Classical Network Theory - Vitold Belevitch

Classical
network theory
V. Belevitch
Prefessor, University of Louvain
Director, MELE Research Laboratory, Brussels
Holden-Day
San Francisco, Cambridge, London, Amsterdam
© Copyright 1968 by Holden-Day, Inc.,
500 Sansome Street, San Francisco, California.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form,
by mimeograph or any other means, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 68-12432
Printed in the United States of America
preface
The title of this book was chosen to conveniently evoke a number of restrictions
in its contents: (i) The book deals only with the analysis and synthesis of lumped
linear time-invariant passive networks in the complex frequency domain; (ii) it treats
only the fundamental theoretical problems where definitive and complete solutions
have been obtained; (iii) applications are excluded, except as occasional illustrations
of the theory. But classical does not mean old-fashioned: in the field thus restricted,
the book is hopefully complete, goes much farther than even the most recent works
on the subject, and contains a high proportion of unpublished material and results.
In particular, nonreciprocal and complex passive elements are included almost from
the beginning, the outlook afforded by the state variable approach is considered
whenever it appears useful, and the treatment extends up to the most advanced
results in n-port synthesis. On the other hand, in the field of transformerless synthesis,
where most problems are difficult and unsolved, only a few classical results are
discussed. As for applications, my initial intention was to cover at least the most
important and classical field of filter synthesis but, because of lack of time and space,
this will be treated in a separate book; as a consequence, the approximation problem
has also been excluded.
The most important unpublished results contained in this book are the canonic
realizations of various 2n-port sections occurring in the cascade synthesis of n-ports
of Chapters 10 and 11. In many other chapters, however, a new approach has
allowed the unification and simplification of various known formulations, thus
yielding intermediate new results and, because of the introduction of new concepts,
a better understanding of the general structure of the theory. This applies, for
instance, to the state-variable discussions of Chapters 3 and 8, to the systematic use
of positive matrices and bounded matrices with complex coefficients, and to the
adaptation of the Oono-Yasuura synthesis of Chapter 12.
V
.x
vi preface
Although the book is self-contained and does not assume any previous knowledge
of network theory, it is by no means elementary and presupposes a working knowledge
of matrix algebra and of the theory of analytic functions, up to the level normally
attained by graduate electrical engineers. Additional mathematical prerequisites are
given in two appendices. Appendix A is mainly devoted to the canonical forms of
constant and polynomial matrices and is presented in the old-fashioned style of matrix
algebra rather than in the language of vector-spaces, which seems less appropriate
for network applications. This appendix contains only classical algebraic results;
special results obtained more recently by network theorists in relation with synthesis
problems are included in the main text. Appendix B deals with the relations
between real and imaginary parts of analytic functions. Both appendices should be
consulted, at least for terminology and notations.
Part of the material has been used in my lectures at the University of Louvain,
but the book is conceived as a treatise rather than as a textbook. This, and lack of
time, explains, but does not excuse, the absence of exercises. My main purpose, how-
ever, is to present a complete panorama of the present state of the theory and of its
results, rather than to educate the reader in the practical application of synthesis
procedures. Most of the algorithms are only of academic interest anyway, as tools in
the proof of existence theorems.
Historical and critical comments are excluded from the main text and con-
centrated at the end of the book, but indexed in the text by superscript integers. A
general bibliography in alphabetical order is also presented at the end, but occasional
references dealing with minor or special points are included in the notes. An abbre-
viation such as [YO 4] refers to the fourth paper by Youla in the general bibliography.
In principle, the latter is restricted to good, recent, and pertinent contributions.
Historical references anterior to 1940 are omitted, since the earlier state of the art is
well covered in classical treatises [CA 2, BO I, TE 6, BA 5] and is now included in
almost every textbook [BA I, GU 2, KU l, VA I, WE I]; additional historical
information may be found in [BE 4, 15] and in the bibliographic notes of [BE 11].
The only books in English dealing with some aspects of n-port synthesis are [HA l,
NE l].
Sections, figures, and equations are numbered consecutively in each chapter.
References to 7.10 and (7 .10) are to section 10 and Eq. (\ 0) of Chapter 7, respectively.
Chapter numbers are omitted for references within the chapter. Reference to theorem
7.10 is to the theorem of section 7.10, for sections are sufficiently short to contain at
most one theorem, which is stated in italics. An abbreviation such as (7.10-12, 14-16)
denotes Eqs. 10 to 12 and 14 to 16 of Chapter 7. Similar condensations are used for
references to bibilography, notes, and figures.
My work owes much to personal contacts or correspondence with D. C. Youla,
B. D. H. Tellegen, R. W. Newcomb, and Y. Oono. I am grateful to K. M. Adams,
A. Fettweis, R. Rohrer, J. Neirynck, and J. Meinguet for criticisms on various parts
of the first draft. The typing was done by Miss A. Toubeau and the figures by
J. P. Van Wayenberge.
V. Belevitch
Brussels, March 1967
contents
Chapter I. Elements and connections

Introduction (1-8)
One-port elements (9-12) 4
Inductance n-ports (13-17) 5
Transformer 2-ports (18-23) 7
Ideal transformer n-ports (24-35) 11
Connections (36-39) 17
Kirchhoff laws (40-44) 20
Loops (45-58) 22
Interconnection of subnetworks (59-65) 27
Kirchhoff networks (66-71) 32
Chapter 2. Network analysis

The network equations (1-5) 36
Free solutions (6-13) 38
Stability (14-21) 41
Forced solutions (22-28) 44
Complex power (29-36) 48
Bilinear forms (37-41) 50
Duality (42-48) 53
Imaginary resistances (49-54) 57
Generalized networks (55-60) 60
viii contents
Chapter 3. Analysis of n-ports
The elimination problem (1---8) 63
Well-defined n-ports (9-16) 66
Passivity and reciprocity of well-defined n-ports (17-22) 71
Dimensionality theorems (23-30) 73
Dimensionality of concrete n-ports (31-39) 76
Uncontrollable states (40-45) 80
Internal variables (46--52) 82
Examples (53-57) 86
Chapter 4. Basic structures and transformations

Introduction (1-7) 91
Congruence transformations (8-12) 94
Elementary 2-port structures (13-19) 97
Symmetric 2-ports (20--24) 102
Cascade connections (25-27) 108
Impedance transformations (28-39) 110
Networks without transformers (40-50) 120
Howitt transformations (51-54) 124
The degree of a Kirchhoff network (55-61) 126
Chapter 5. Synthesis of passive one-ports

Properties of positive functions (6--16) 133
Lossless one-ports (17-24) 136
The Brune synthesis (25-34) 143
Partial specification of an immittance (35-41) 149
Scale transformations (42-48) 154
Chapter 6. Reflection and transmission

Reflection coefficient (1-7) 158
Scattering matrix (8-16) 162
Attenuation and phase (17-24) 165
Relations between scattering and hybrid matrices (25-35) 169
Change of reference (36--40) 173
Applications to 2-ports (41-46) 175
Image parameters (47-54) 179
y
contents ix
Chapter 7. Positive matrices and bounded matrices

Properties of positive matrices (1-9) 183
Reduction of singular matrices (10-17) 185
Bounded matrices (18-28) 189
Synthesis by conjunctive transformations (29-36) 193
Circulators (37-41) 196
Biconjugate 4-ports (42-48) 201
Matched 2-ports (49-56) 209
Bridged-T networks (57-61) 217
Chapter 8. Degree and canonic forms

The degree of an n-port (1---8) 222
Properties of the degree (9-17) 226
The McMillan form (18-26) 228
Kalman's representation (27-31) 231
Similarity transformations (32-40) 235
Equivalence of lossless n-ports (41-51) 241
Explicit formulas for the degree (52-55) 248
The maximum number of parameters of n-ports of given 251
degree (56-64)
Chapter 9. Lossless 2-ports

One-port synthesis by all-pass extraction (1---8) 256
Real one-ports (9-12) 260
Darlington's synthesis (13----18) 264
One-port synthesis without transformers (19-24) 269
Uncontrollable and secular states in one-port synthesis (25-28) 274
The scattering matrix of a lossless 2-port (29-34) 276
Partial specifications of the scattering matrix (35-43) 280
The transfer matrix (44----50) 286
Halving a symmetric lossless 2-port (51-62) 292
Open-circuit behavior (63-65) 299
Chapter I0. Synthesis of passive n-ports

Principles of the iterative synthesis (1-11) 303
The section of degree I (12-14) 310
Real n-ports (15-22) 314
Sections of degree 2 (23----31) 319
y
x contents
Chapter 11. Factorization of scattering matrices
Factorization theorems (1-11) 329
All-pass 2n-ports (12-23) 334
Cascade n-port synthesis (24---29) 343
Reciprocal n-ports (30-35) 350
Chapter 12. Unitary bordering of scattering matrices

The equation G = HH (6---14) 363
The basic solution (15-18) 368
Physical solutions of minimum dimension (19-24) 371
Symmetric solutions of minimum dimension (25-29) 375
Solutions of nonminimum dimension (30-31) 378
Symmetric solutions of minimum degree (32-38) 381
Appendix A. Matrix algebra

Terminology and notations (1-4) 385
Partitioned matrices (5-8) 386
Theorems on determinants (9-14) 387
Rank (15-26) 389
Linear equations (27-29) 392
Congruence transformations of hermitian matrices (30-47) 393
Unitary transformations (48-68) 400
Polynomial matrices (69-76) 406
Smith and Jordan forms (77-90) 409
Appendix B. Properties of analytic functions

Extremal theorems (1-2) 417
Hilbert transforms (3-5) 418
The logarithm of a rational function (6---9) 420
Notes 423
References 430
Index 435
Classical network theory
chapter I
Elements and connections
Introduction
1. An electrical network is a system composed of a finite number of inter-
connected elements. The conventional elements are resistances, capacitances, induc-
tances (susceptible to mutual coupling), and generators. These elements are
idealizations of actual physical devices and obey the established laws of
electromagnetic theory relating various physical magnitudes such as current,
voltage, energy, and so forth, which are real scalar functions of time. The
interconnection constraints are embodied in Kirchhoff laws, also deduced from
electromagnetic theory. The description of a physical system in terms of
scalar magnitudes (rather than in terms of electromagnetic field vectors)
involves various idealizations and approximations which are acceptable in
certain situations that need not be discussed here: an electrical system is a
network, whenever the assumed type of description is adequate.
2. Network theory takes the equations characterizing the elements and the
interconnections as a starting point and studies the properties of complex
systems built from various types of elements. As a consequence, network
theory borrows from electromagnetic theory both its basic concepts (taken
as undefinables) and its elementary laws (accepted as postulates); the
development of the theory itself is then a purely mathematical construction
generated by the accepted sets of axioms. Since the set of axioms originally
supplied by physics implies certain limitations and idealizations, it need not
be taken as absolute, but can be subjected to various generalizations (for
instance, accepting negative resistances) or restrictions (for instance, ex-
cluding mutual coupling); however, these must be kept within reasonable
1
2 I. Elements and connections
limits if one wishes to avoid completely unrealistic constructions. From the

historical evolution of network theory, certain preferred sets of axioms and
concepts have emerged, which make the theory as simple and as powerful
as possible. These will be introduced and explained in the first two chapters.
3. It is often convenient to separate conceptually some part of a network

from its surroundings. This is useful, for instance, when a whole class of
networks is studied, in which some subnetwork 1 is kept invariant. A subnet-
work is thus a conceptual entity intermediate between the elements and the
complete network, and an element is simply a subnetwork which cannot be
decomposed any further. Consider a network as decomposed into two parts:
some subnetwork and its complement. In the absence of electromagnetic
field interaction, the two parts only exchange energy, within the complete
network, through some finite number t of interconnecting wires. The isola-
tion of one subnetwork leaves in it t wires hanging free, which may be
stopped at some t terminals conventionally considered as belonging to the
subnetwork. The complete network is then reconstructed by identifying ter-
minal i (i = 1, 2, ... , t) of the subnetwork with terminal i of its complement.
A subnetwork having t terminals 1s a !-terminal subnetwork; in contrast, a
network has no free terminals.
4. Since the total current entering an isolated electrical system is zero, a

subnetwork must have at least two terminals, and the current entering the
subnetwork through one terminal then leaves it through the other terminal.
Since a voltage can only be defined, or measured, between two terminals,
the description of a two-terminal subnetwork involves only one current
(through the subnetwork) and one voltage (across the subnetwork). In sub-
networks with more than two terminals the situation is more complex: for
t terminals, current conservation leaves t - 1 independent currents, whereas
there are t(t - 1) /2 measurable voltages. Simplicity reappears whenever
terminals are associated into pairs, either because of the nature of the sub-
network (this occurs in a transformer, owing to the galvanic isolation be-
tween the windings) or because of its surroundings (for instance, if the
complementary subnetwork consists of a number of separate 2-terminal
devices). A terminal pair is called a port whenever it is characterized by one
current and one voltage, and a subnetwork having only such terminal pairs
(n in number) is called an n-port. Voltages across two terminals belonging to
different ports (nonport voltages) are then disregarded. When necessary, we
will distinguish between true n-ports (if the port nature of the terminal pairs
is caused by the internal structure of the subnetwork, as in the case of the
transformer) and subnetworks behaving as n-ports (when the port nature is
imposed by the surroundings). Since an n-port has been defined as a par-
Introduction 3
ticular case of a t-terminal subnetwork, it is not a network. In particular, it

must be clear that the ports are not considered as terminated on open
circuits, although they are drawn this way in an isolated representation of an
n-port, but on some ports of an unspecified complementary network.
5. Then ports of an n-port will be numbered 1, 2, ... , n. The two terminals

of port p are noted p and p', with the convention that the voltage Vp is
measured between p (taken as the positive terminal) and p', whereas the
current called ip enters the n-port through terminal p. A polarity reversal at
port p interchanges terminals p and p', and changes the signs of both ip and
Vp. In the schematic of an n-port, the polarity of port p is defined by the
terminal labels p and p'. When ports are not explicitly numbered, the polari-
ties must be indicated by some other means: the usual technical convention
is to place a large black dot near the positive terminal of each port.
6. In the problem of network analysis, the description of a complete network

is given, and one wants to compute the currents and voltages at various
points. This is done by deducing from the network description a set of
equations and solving them. 2 The problem of n-port analysis is of a different
nature, since the number of equations is normally smaller than the number
of unknowns because of the unspecified nature of the surroundings (the
equations of the complementary subnetwork are lacking). However, the
unknowns can be separated into port variables (currents and voltages at the
ports) and internal variables (other currents and voltages appearing in the
equations). After the internal variables have been eliminated 3 from all
equations, a set of equations remains, which relates the port variables among
themselves. Such a set (or any mathematically equivalent set) forms the
equations of the n-port and completely defines its external behavior in all sur-
roundings. Any set of port variables satisfying the n-port equations is called
an admissible state (or simply a state4 ) of the n-port. Two n-ports are equivalent
when they accept the same states, even if they have different internal struc-
tures; their equations are then mathematically equivalent.
7. In the problem of n-port synthesis, one wants to construct an n-port having

a prescribed external behavior. This means that its admissible states are
either listed (which is impractical, for such a list is generally infinite) or
implicitly defined by some prescribed set of n-port equations. A solution of
the synthesis problem is any n-port whose detailed internal description gives
a system of equations from which the prescribed n-port equations can be
deduced by elimination of the internal variables. Since a particular synthesis
problem has an unknown number of solutions (maybe zero) at the moment
when it is merely posed, the statement of the problem does not define, even
implicitly, one n-port but rather an equivalence class (possible vacuous) of

n-ports. Such an equivalence class is considered as a single abstract n-port and
is defined by its equations relating n ordered pairs ip, Vp (p = 1, 2, ... , n) of
port variables. An abstract n-port is represented as a black box (of unknown
and perhaps absurd internal description) with n terminal pairs. By contrast,
an n-port whose internal description is known is a concrete n-port. Any solution
of a synthesis problem yields a concrete n-port which is a realization of the
prescribed abstract n-port. All realizations are equivalent concrete n-ports.
8. At the level of elements, the problems of analysis and synthesis disappear.

An element cannot be analyzed: the description of electromagnetic phenom-
ena inside the elements lies outside the scope of network theory, but such
description does lead to relations between port variables which are taken as
the postulates abstractly defining the elements. But an element is also con-
crete, for its realization is trivial: it is simply to be taken from stock, since
device manufacture is also ignored by network theory.
One-port elements
9. In accordance with 8, resistances, inductances, and capacitances are
abstractly defined by
v = Ri; v = d(Li)/dt; i = d(Cv)/dt (1)
respectively. Although the description of magnetic phenomena inside an
inductor is not a part of network theory, it is important to know that, all
things being equal, an inductance is proportional to its number of turns n.
The equation v = d(Li)/dt originates from Lenz's law v = ndcp/dt, where cp is
the magnetic flux in the core; the flux itself is hA, where h is the magnetomotive
force and A the permeance (inverse reluctance) of the core; finally, the magneto-
motive force is equal to the ampere-turns ni. Combining these relations, one
obtains L = n2A, and the inductance per turn A is the permeance of the core.
10. The definition of a resistance can alternatively be written i = Gv, where

G = 1/R is the conductance. In contrast, the current in an inductance and the
voltage across a capacitance are deduced only from the complementary
variables within an arbitrary integration constant. For a capacitance, the
integration of the defining equation yields
l ft
v(t) - v(O) = C O
i dt (2)
and the supplementary datum v(O) (initial voltage) must be specified in order
to define the state of a capacitance. Similarly, the initial current must be
Inductance n-ports 5
specified for an inductance. Since the state is completely specified by v for a

capacitance, v is called a state variable; similarly, i is a state variable for an
inductance. The concept of state variable is of no interest for a resistance
and will not be used.
11. For conventional elements, the parameters R, L, and C are constants. The
elements are called linear, because the parameters are independent of the
electric state of the element, and time-invariant, because the parameters do
not vary with time. Conventional elements are thus linear time-invariant.
Moreover, the values of the parameters are restricted by inequalities deduced
from energy and power considerations. The instantaneous power entering a port
is defined as the product w = vi. Power can be dissipated but not generated
in a conventional resistance; thus w = vi= Ri 2 must be nonnegative for all i;
this requires R :2 0. In addition to the dissipated power, electromagnetic theory
considers the electrical energy Te localized in capacitances and the magnetic
energy Tm localized in inductances. The rate of increase dTe/dt of electrical
energy in a capacitance is the instantaneous power w = vi entering the
element; moreover, the energy vanishes when the voltage is zero (the vanishing
of the current is not sufficient, for the current only determines the voltage
within an integration constant), and is nonnegative for all other states. Since
w =vi= Cv dv/dt = d(Cv 2 /2)dt, the electric energy is Te= Cv 2 /2, since the
integration constant must be zero to give Te= 0 for v = 0. As a consequence,
one has C ::2: 0. For the magnetic energy in an inductance, similar statements
hold true, but the current plays the role of the voltage: one has w = Li di/dt
= d(Li 2 /2) /dt, and Tm= Li 2 /2. This establishes L > 0.
12. A voltage generator is a one-port defined by v = e, where e is a given

function of time. A current generator is a one-port defined by i = k, where k is a
given function of time. Finally, the equation v = 0 defines a short circuit,
which can be considered as a zero resistance or inductance, as an infinite
capacitance with zero initial voltage, or as a zero voltage generator; s1m1-
larly, the equation i = 0 defines an open circuit.
Inductance n-ports
13. Since magnetic field interaction between subnetworks is excluded from
the concepts of network theory, a system of n mutually coupled inductances
is considered as a single element which cannot be analyzed. Since the n
windings are galvanically isolated, the element is a true n-port. It is abstractly
defined by its equations
d n
Vi = -dt ,L Li; i; (i= 1, 2, ... , n) (3)
J ~1
where Lii is the mutual inductance of windings i and j, whereas Lu is the self-
inductance of winding i. Equations (3) are unambiguous only if relative polarities
of the ports are specified, for LiJ becomes -LiJ if the polarity at port i, but
not at portj, is reversed. By contrast, a self-inductance, just as any other one-
port parameter, is insensitive to the port polarity, because Eqs. (I) are
invariant to a simultaneous change of sign in i and v.
14. Define the vector i of port currents, of entries ii, i2, ... , in, and similarly
the vector v ofport voltages. Define the inductance matrix L = IILtJ 11- The Eqs. (3)
of an inductance n-port take the form
d .
v=-Lz (4)
dt
The total instantaneous power entering an n-port is the scalar product
w= L Vtit= v'i = i'v (5)
15. For conventional linear time-invariant inductance n-ports, the para-

meters Ltj are constants and restricted by various inequalities deduced from
energy considerations. In addition to the properties mentioned in 11, it is
known from electromagnetic theory that the magnetic energy of a system is a
statefunction; this means that it depends only on the instantaneous values of
the currents and not on the voltages nor on the previous history of the
system. By (3) and (5), the total power entering an inductance n-port is
. di1
w = ~ ~ Ltj Zi dt (6)
i J
By comparison with w = dTm/dt, the energy increase is

dTm = Li Lj Ltj it di1 (7)
Since Tm is a state function of the i1, its total differential is

oTm
dTm= } : - . di1 (8)
j oz,
Since the variables i1 are independent, a comparison of (7) and (8) shows
oTm
-.-= LLiiii
0Zj i
Thus
o2 Tm
oi, oi1 --L·1
i
Transformer 2-ports 7
which proves that

(all i, j)
so that the inductance matrix Lis symmetric.
16. Expression (6) can be rewritten

. di
W=t'L-
dt
Since it is a scalar, it is equal to its transpose where L' can be replaced by L.
Then one also has
Consequently, the magnetic energy is

Tm= i'Li/2 (9)
for the integration constant must vanish. Since the magnetic energy (9) is
positive, (9) is a positive definite quadratic form. To conclude, we have
proved that if Eqs. (3) represent a physical system of n coupled linear time-
invariant inductances, the inductance matrix L is symmetric and positive de.finite.
17. The rank of an inductance n-port is defined as the rank r (0::;;; r < n) of its
inductance matrix. The integration of (4), written v = dif,/dt, where if, is the
vector Li, gives
f; v dt = if,(t) -if,(0)
For an n-port of rank r, only r entries of if, are linearly independent, and this
holds at all times, since the relations of linear dependence have constant
coefficients. As a result, it is sufficient to specify r initial conditions, by giving some
r linearly independent entries ofif,(O). Physically, the entries ofif, are propor-
tional to the magnetic fluxes in the windings, and the number of independent
fluxes is determined by the structure of the magnetic network on which the
coils are wound, in a way which is irrelevant to our present discussion.
Transformer 2-ports
18. Two windings on the same magnetic core constitute an inductance 2-
port, or transformer (Fig. 1). It is often convenient to refer to the winding at
port 1 (input) as the primary and to the winding at port 2 (output) as the
secondary. A change of polarity at one port changes the sign of L 12 without
1'n-------' .__---02'
Fm. 1.1
altering either Lu or L 22 , so that the representation of Fig. 2 is equivalent

to the one of Fig. 1. If Lu -=jc 0, the positive definiteness of the inductance
matrix requires, by (A.46),
L 11 > 0; L11 L22 - Li2 > 0 (10)
and L 22 > 0 is a consequence of (10).
19. If terminals l' and 2 are identified, both windings are connected in
series and thus form a single inductance between terminals 1 and 2'. Its
value Lo is computed by making i2 = ii in the equations (since the current
leaving l' must now enter 2) and by identifying the total voltage v = v 1 v2+
with d(Loi1)/dt. This gives
Lo = Lu + L22 + 2L12 ( 11)
and shows that the total inductance is larger than the sum of the separate
inductances of the two windings if L12 is positive (series-aiding connection) but
smaller than this sum if L12 is negative (series-opposing connection). Since the
self-inductance of a coil is proportional to the square of its number of turns, a
decrease of inductance in the second case, compared with the first, can only
result from the fact ~hat the two windings are wound in opposite directions,
so that certain turns cancel out in the series combination. The sign of L12
thus characterizes the relative direction of the windings.
------02'
l'e>----_,
Fm. 1.2
Transformer 2-ports 9
20. If Lu or L22 vanishes, so does L12 by A.40, so mutual inductances have no

separate physical existence without the associated self-inductances. Assume that
Lu =i= 0 and L22 ::;i: O; by (10) the ratio L22/L11 is positive and will be called
n2 , with n real. Since this does not determine the sign of n, one is free to
attribute to it the sign of L12. Since L21 and L22 are respectively proportional
to the square of the number of primary and secondary turns, lnl is the turns-
ratio between secondary and primary; n is the algebraic turns-ratio, which is
positive or negative depending on whether the winding directions are iden-
tical or opposite with respect to the polarities of the ports.
,'21. For an inductance 2-port, the coupling coefficient is defined by

k = IL12/(Lu L22) 1121
and is real, owing to (10). Moreover, the last inequality (IO) is eq1,1.ivalent
to k ::::;: I. The case k = l corresponds to peifect coupling. In that case one has
L12 = ±(Lu L22) 1l2 = nLu, the ambiguous sign disappearing in the last
member, for Lu is positive and n has the sign of L12. Equations (3) become
d
v2 = nLu - (ii + ni2) (12)
dt
and their ratio yklds
(13)
Although a division by
d
Lu dt (ii+ ni2) (14)
occurs in the derivation of ( 13) from ( 12), ( 13) is valid even when ( 14)
vanishes, for (12) then gives v1 = v2 = 0. By (13), a perfectly coupled induc-
tance 2-port (or peifect transformer) transforms an input voltage v1 into an
output voltage (13), in the proportion of the algebraic turns-ratio. It is
represented as shown in Fig. 3, the vertical bar between the windings
1a-----.
1'a------'
Fm. 1.3
symbolizing the common core; it is sufficient to indicate the value of one in-
ductance, and the turns-ratio. Since the condition k = 1 is equivalent to
det L = 0, L has rank 1, and one initial condition is sufficient to integrate
( I 2), as it clearly appears since only the initial value of ii + ni 2 (proportional
to the flux in the core) need be specified.
22. Take the equations of a perfect transformer 2-port and allow Lu to tend
to infinity; dividing ( 12) by Lu, one obtains ii + ni 2 = constant. If there is
no flux initially, the integration constant is zero, and one has
( 15)
Since, with (15) and Lu= oo, (14) is indeterminate of the form oo · 0, the
derivation of (13) from (12) is not necessarily forbidden in spite of (15). One
can, therefore, consider the 2-port satisfying ( 13) and ( 15) simultaneously as
a self-consistent concept derived from a physical inductance 2-port by a
mathematically legitimate limiting process. The 2-port defined by (13) and
( 15) is called an ideal transformer of ratio n and is represented by the symbol
of Fig. 4. If the polarity at one port is reversed, n is changed into -n .
ln-----
• ..------02
•
1 n
II
l'o-----' .__---02'
Fm. 1.4
23. Although derived from an inductance 2-port, the ideal transformer is

not an inductance 2-port: the total power entering the ideal transformer is
i1v1 + i2 v2 = 0, owing to (13) and (15), so that the magnetic energy is con-
stant; this constant is zero, owing to the initial conditions, so that the notion
of magnetic energy becomes irrelevant. In the representation of Fig. 4,
a symbol different from the one used for ordinary inductances has been
adopted for the windings of an ideal transformer, in order to emphasize their
nonmagnetic nature. Because of the limiting process involved in its genesis,
the ideal transformer is not an actual physical device; it can be approximated
as closely as desired by a physical inductance 2-port, provided ii + ni2 is
not strictly constant; this expression may, however, be made as small and as
slowly variable as desired. The last requirement excludes exact transformer
Ideal transformer n-ports 11
behavior in DC (direct current), whereas in the definition of the ideal trans-

former, Eqs. (13) and (15) are assumed to hold for all states, including DC;
it is only through this extreme performance that the ideal transformer appears
more strongly nonphysical than the conventional 2-port elements whose
definitions also imply a number of idealizations.
Ideal transformer n-ports

24. Consider (Fig. 5) k ideal transformers whose primaries are connected in
2 k
,. 2' k'
Fm. 1.5
parallel, and whose k separate secondaries form the ports of a k-port. Denote
by nt the ratio of the ith transformer, by Jt and it its primary and secondary
currents, and by Vt its secondary voltage; the primary voltage u is common
to all transformers, owing to the parallel connection. The equations of the
ith transformer are
Vi = nt u; Ji + nt it = 0 (16)
Since L ji = 0, one obtains
k
Inti,= o (17)
i~l
by summing the current equations. On the other hand, eliminating u be-

tween the voltage equations gives
v1/n1 = v2/n2 = · · · =vk/nk (18)

Equations ( 17) and ( 18) are the equations of the k-port.
25. Just as the ideal transformer 2-port was obtained as the limit of a perfect
transformer with infinite inductance, the ideal k-port defined by (17, 18) can
be obtained as the limit of a k-winding perfect transformer. Such a trans-
former is represented in Fig. 6. If all windings are perfectly coupled two by
1 2 k 1 2 k
n2 nkj
I I II I I\
,· 2' k' 1' 2' k'
Fm. 1.6 Fm. 1.7
two, the voltages across any two windings are proportional to their number
of turns, and (18) is immediately established. Note also that, in the first
Eq. (16), u is interpreted as the voltage per turn. On the other hand, the flux
in the common core on which all windings are wound is the total magneto-
motive force L ni ii multiplied by the core permeance. The inductance of
every winding becomes infinite with the core permeance (that is, for instance,
if the permeability of the magnetic material is infinite). If one divides the
flux expression by the permeance, it appears that the total magnetomotive
force vanishes at the limit, and Eq. (17) is obtained. Since the k-port of
Fig. 5 can thus be thought to originate from the multiwinding transformer
of Fig. 6, it is natural to call it a multiwinding ideal transformer and to represent
it as shown in Fig. 7. As such, the concept of multiwinding ideal transformers
is redundant in the theory, since the realization of Fig. 5 in terms of 2-port
ideal transformers is available. Its use, however, is so frequent that the
representation of Fig. 7, more convenient than that of Fig. 5, deserved to be
introduced, and the above explanation was merely given to justify its origin.
26. Consider (Fig. 8) a numbers of k-winding ideal transformers and connect

in series alljth windings to form portj ofa k-port. Denote by mii the number
of turns of the jth winding of the ith transformer, and by Ui the voltage per
turn on the ith transformer. For the ith transformer, relation (17) becomes
in this notation
k
I mi1i1= o
j=l
and the set of these relations for all transformers (i = 1, 2, ... , s) is the
matrix relation
Mi=O (19)
where i is the vector of the port currents and M the current-constraint matrix
of the resulting k-port. Mis a rectangular (s · k)-matrix. On the other hand,
the voltage across the winding mij is mij ui, and the voltage at port j is the
sum of these expressions for all i; thus
8 8
Vj = L mii Ui = i~l
i~l
L mij ui
The set of these relations for all ports (j = 1, 2, ... , k) is the matrix relation
v=M'u (20)
27. Equations (19) and (20) are not the final equations of the k-port of
Fig. 8, for nonport variables (entries of the vector u) appear in (20).
1 2 k
1 I
2' k'
Fm. 1.8
Elimination of u from (20) is equivalent to a transformation of (20) by

premultiplication by some matrix K. This yields
Kv=0 (21)
if K is such that
KM'=0 (22)
A method of deducing from M a matrix K satisfying (22) will be described

in 30. The matrix K is the voltage-constraint matrix of the k-port.
28. The ideal tran.iformer k-ports of current-constraint matrices Mand TM, where T
is an arbitrary nonsingular matrix, are equivalent. The current equations Mi= 0
and TMi = 0 are clearly equivalent, and the voltage equation (20) based
on TM is M' ( T'u) = v. This has the same physical meaning as (20) if the
vector of the voltages per turn is called T'u instead of u. In any case, pre-
multiplication of the last equation by K yields the same voltage equation (21 ),
owing to (22).
29. The replacement of M by TM may be of interest, since it may reduce

some entries of the matrix to zero, thus producing an equivalent realization
according to Fig. 8, possibly with fewer windings. In particular, one may
reduce M to its normal form (A.28) in accordance with (A.17-18). Let M
have rank r ( <s, <k), let
(r) (k -r)
[Maa, Mab] (r) (23)
be some r linearly independent rows of M, and assume that Maa is non-
singular (possibly after the relabeling of the ports). With
N=M-;;/Mab (24)
a rectangular (r · q)-matrix where
q=k-r (25)
the normal form of M is
(k -r)
~ ] (r)(s -r) (26)
30. With the matrix (26), and a partition of the electrical vectors i and v
into subvectors of subscript a (first r entries) and b (last q entries), Eqs.
(19-20) become
(27)
U = Va (28)
N'u = vb (29)
Elimination of u between (28) and (29) yields
N'va -Vb= 0 (30)
so (27) and (30) are the equations of the transformer k-port. It is easily
checked that (30) is of the form (21) with
K= [N', -lq] (31)
and that (22) is satisfied by (26) and (31).
31. If the transformer k-port of current-constraint matrix M is realized as

the equivalent k-port of matrix (26), the last s - r rows produce windings
with zero turns and may as well be dropped. The reduced current-constraint
matrix is
[ 1r, N] (32)
still equivalent to M. If Fig. 8 is redrawn for the case where M is in the
form (32), and if the windings of zero turns resulting from submatrix Ir are
omitted, one obtains Fig. 9. The entries of the (r · q)-matrix N appear as
turn-ratios with respect to the number of turns of the leftmost windings
r+1 r+2 k
(r+1)' (r+2)' k'

Fm. 1.9
(labeled I) on each core, and the k ports are subdivided into a generalized
primary cif r shunt ports (subscript a) and a generalized secondary of k - r = q
series ports (subscript b).
32. The form (32) of M is called a normal form of the current-constraint

matrix. Similarly, (31) is a normal form of the voltage-constraint matrix K.
These forms are not unique, for M may contain several nonsingular sub-
matrices of dimension r, all susceptible to play the role of Maa in (23).
Their interest, however, comes from the fact that both Kand Mare defined
in terms of a smaller number of parameters, the entries of the rectangular
matrix N. The dimensions of N are the same for all normal forms; the number
of rows is r and is called the rank of the transformer k-port (note that r is the
rank of Mand not of N, which certainly has smaller rank if k - r < r); the
number of columns of N is (25) and is called the nullity cif the transformer
k-port. By (31), the nullity cif the transformer k-port is the rank cif its matrix K.
Equations (27) and (30) show that the rank is the number cif linearly independent
port voltages and that the nullity is the number of independent port currents. The
ideal transformer 2-port defined by ( 13) and ( 15) is obtained as a particular
case if N is taken as a scalar (turns-ratio); N is therefore called a ratio matrix
of the k-port.
33. In the following we will indifferently consider an ideal transformer
k-port of rank r as represented by Fig. 8 and defined by Eqs. ( 19) and (20),
or as represented by Fig. 9 and defined by Eqs. (27) and (30). Both repre-
sentations have their advantages: in Fig. 8 all ports are treated symmetrically,
which is not the case in Fig. 9; on the other hand, Eq. (20) involves the
vector u, which is irrelevant to the description of the external performance
of the k-port. According to the particular application to be considered, the
advantage of one or the other representation may be decisive. For theoretical
discussions, the schematics of Figs. 8 and 9 are unnecessarily detailed, and
we adopt the more symbolic representations of Figs. IO and 11, respectively.
Instead of Fig. 11, we will also use occasionally the representation of Fig. 12,
where the generalized input (a) and output (b) are each symbolized by a
single port. Note that the current-constraint matrices figure in all represen-
tations, for they are in direct correspondence with the numbers of turns.
Note also that, since N is not unique, the concepts of shunt ports and series
ports have no physically invariant meaning. In other words, one calls shunt
ports any set of ports appearing as shunt ports in at least one normal form.
34. Instantaneous power is conserved in an ideal transformer k-port: the total power
entering through all ports is w = v'i = v~ ia + v;, ib and is zero, for (27) gives
v~ ia = -v~ Nib whereas the transpose of (30) gives v;, ib = v~ Nib. Con-
versely, if a k-port conserves instantaneous power and is defined by separate linear
Connections 17
r+l k
1
1 2 k 1' b
lr, N
a
M r 1r, N
a'
1' 2' k' (r+l)' k' b'
FIG. 1.10 FIG. 1.11 FIG. 1.12
constraints for currents on one hand and for voltages on the other, it is an ideal trans-
former k-port: any current constraints of the form (19) can be written in the
normal form (27) where some linearly independent currents ib determine the
+
values of the remaining currents ia; from (27) and v~ ia v;, ib = 0, one
deduces (v;, - v~ N)ib = 0; thus v;, - v~ N = 0, for the ib are arbitrary and
the transpose of the last equation is (30). The last theorem shows that once
current constraints and energy conservation are imposed, the voltage con-
straints are no longer free. This explains why a transformer k-port can be
essentially specified by a single matrix N.
35. Algebraically, r is restricted by 0 < r:::;; k, but the extreme cases r = 0

and r = k are trivial. Because one dimension of the matrix N is zero in either
case, N = 0. Moreover, one of the sets of ports distinguished by the subscripts
a (the r first ports) and b (the k - r last ports) becomes empty, so that the
only remaining equation is vb = 0 for r = 0 and ia = 0 for r = k. This shows
that the k-port reduces to k separate short circuits at each port in the first
case, and to k separate open circuits in the second.
Connections
36. Figure 13 shows an example of a network with six branches and four
nodes (or vertices). Each branch is arbitrarily oriented, the arrow determining
the direction in which the branch current is taken as positive. The elements
in the branches have been represented as rectangles, for their exact nature
is irrelevant to our present discussion: the elements may be one-ports
3 4
Fm. 1.13
(R, L, C) or n-ports (for instance, branches 1 and 2 may be the windings of a

transformer). In order to separate the elements from the connections, it is
convenient to redraw the network of Fig. 13 as shown in Fig. 14, simulating a
laboratory model where the elements are plugged into sockets on a board
(represented by the dotted line), whereas the connections are made under
the board. What remains after unplugging the elements is the set of con-
nections; in the representation of Fig. 14 it is apparent that the elements
1 3 6
-+ ~ -+
1
2
I:
,, 3
4
Fm. 1.14
Connections 19
form a k-port (6-port in our example), whereas the connections form a 2k-
terminal subnetwork (12-terminal in our example). In accordance with 4,
the connection subnetwork behaves as a k-port within the complete network,
owing to the true k-port nature of the complementary subnetwork (the
elements), but it is not a true k-port since there are connections between
terminals belonging to different ports. However, since the situation is always
of such a nature in the problem of network analysis, it is sufficient to estab-
lish the equations of the connection subnetwork considered as a k-port.
These equations, together with the equations defining the elements, will then
constitute the complete network equations. In the following, therefore, we
will treat the connection subnetwork as a connection k-port and derive its
equations.
37. In Fig. 14 the ports of the connection 6-port have been numbered in
accordance with the numbering of the branches of Fig. 13 and the orientation
has been preserved, so the positive current in branch j flows from terminal
j to terminal j'. The four nodes of Fig. 13 correspond to the four sets of
straps in Fig. 14, also numbered in accordance. The connections in Fig. 14
are thus generated by a set of wiring instructions which specify:
(l) strap together terminals l' 2 3

(2) strap together terminals 3' 4' 5
(3) strap together terminals l 46
(4) strap together terminals 2' 5' 6'
The set of2k (here 12) terminals is thus partitioned into a numbers (here 4)
of disjoint subsets, and all the terminals within the same subset are inter-
connected, thus forming a single node in the representation of Fig. 13. The
partition is subjected to the following restrictions: (a) no subset contains
both terminals of a port, for otherwise the element connected at this port
would be short-circuited; (b) the union of the s subsets is the complete
original set of 2n terminals, for, if one terminal at least of some port is left
out, the element connected at this port remains hinged. As a result ofrule (a),
the relation between subset i and portj is ternary and can be symbolized by
+ l if subset i contains terminal j

mt1 = ( - I if subset i con ta ins terminal j'
0 if subset i contains neither j nor j'
the fourth possibility (both j and j') having been excluded. This defines an
(s · k)-matrix M which is equivalent to the list of wiring instructions: each
row of the matrix specifies the terminals to be strapped together by a single
wire. As an example, the matrix for the network of Fig. 14 is
2 3 4 5 6
1 -1 0 0 0
2 0 0 -1 -1 1 0
3 1 0 0 1 0
4 0 -1 0 0 -1 -1
38. Since the subsets are disjoint and since the partition is complete, ter-
minalj must appear in one and only one subset, and similarly for terminalj'.
This shows that column j, thus each column of M, contains exactly one + I and
one - I entry, all remaining entries being 0. A matrix of entries O and ± 1 satis-
fying this condition will be called a partition matrix. Conversely, any partition
(s · k)-matrix defines a partition of 2n terminals into s disjoint subsets, and
this corresponds to an electrically acceptable interconnection pattern, so
that partition matrices and network structures are in one-to-one corre-
spondence. The matrix notation assumes, however, that subsets and ports
are numbered in some arbitrary order, and that polarities are defined at
each port.
39. If an abstraction is made from the electrical nature of the branches in a

representation such as the one of Fig. 13, the network becot.nes an oriented
graph 5 of k branches and s nodes. In this topological representation, the
partition matrix is reinterpreted as the node-to-branch incidence matrix of the
graph, with the definition
-1 if branch j is directed towards node i
mtJ = ( + I if branch j is directed away from node i (33)
0 if branch j does not meet node i
The only + 1 and -1 entries of column j of M are then the terminal nodes
ofbranchj. The graphical representation ofa network is merely a convenient
symbolization of the incidence or identification relations, and so is the
algebraic representation by the partition matrix. The matrix notation intro-
duces an arbitrary labeling which is absent in the graphical representation
(where the vertices and branches need not be numbered), but the latter
introduces, as parasitic features, the relative positions of the elements in
physical space or in the plane of the drawing.
Kirchhoff laws
40. Denote by i1 and v1 the current and voltage at port j (j = 1, 2, ... , k)
of the connection k-port, and by Ut the common potential of all terminals of
subset i (i = 1, 2, ... , s). This defines vectors i, v, and u. In the expression
Kirchhoff laws 21
Li mtJ Ut, only two coefficients are different from zero and are of opposite
sign, so the expression yields the potential difference between the terminal
nodes ofbranchj, which is VJ. The set ofresulting equations, in matrix form,
is (20). On the other hand, the first Kirchhoff law expressing that the sum
of the currents at node i vanishes is expressed by LJ mtJ i1 = 0, and the set of
resulting equations at all nodes is ( 19). This shows that a connection k-port
is a particular case of an ideal transformer k-port, the only difference being
that the current-constraint matrix (which had arbitrary real numbers as
entries in a transformer) is replaced by the partition matrix which has entries
0 and ± 1 with exactly two nonzero entries of opposite sign per column.
The constraints imposed by connections are often called topological, and
the partition matrix may equivalently be called topological current-constraint
matrix.
41. The equations of a connection k-port are thus ( 19) and (20), or all the
equivalent forms discussed in 28-31, in particular the normal forms (27)
and (30). In the transformation of a partition matrix Minto an equivalent
constraint matrix TM, the simple structural properties of partition matrices
may become disguised. The transformed matrices are still called topological
if they originate from a partition matrix. This raises the important question:
what are the necessary and sufficient conditions for a constraint matrix to be
topological? This will be partially answered in 56 and 57.
42. As a particular case of 34, a connection k-port conserves instantaneous

power; this is usually stated by saying that the constraints imposed by Kirchhoff
laws are workless. Conversely, one of the Kirchhoff laws can be deduced from
the other and from power conservation. The choice as to what laws of
electromagnetism are more fundamental is a matter of taste.
43. The invariants r (rank of M) and nullity q = k - r introduced in 32 are

also of interest in the case of topological constraints, and are called the rank
and nullity of the graph. In general, a graph may be composed of a number p
of separate parts without connection to each other (possibly coupled by induc-
tion). If p = 1, the graph is connected. If one short-circuits all branches of a
graph, thus making v = 0, expression (20) becomes M'u = 0. Since M' has
rank r and u is an s-vector, there are s - r linearly independent nonzero
solutions for u. On the other hand, since each row of M' has only one + 1
and one -1 entry, the equations M'u = 0 express equalities between node
potentials, two by two, and s - r is the number of distinct node potentials in
the graph with all branches shorted. But, in such a situation, a network of p
parts reduces to p separate points, each having an arbitrary potential, and
one must have p = s - r. Consequently, the rank of a graph is simply the
difference between the number ef nodes and the number of separate parts. As in 32,
the rank r = s - p of a graph is the number ef independent branch voltages and the
+
nullity q = k - s p is the number ef independent branch currents.
44. In 31 it was shown that, for r < s, s - r rows of the current-constraint

matrix M could simply be dropped. For a connected graph (p = s - r = I),
one arbitrary row of M can be dropped. For p #- I, clearly one row per
separate part can be dropped. The resulting matrix is called the reduced
partition matrix (or reduced node-to-branch incidence matrix). It has at most one + I
and -1 entry per column. In the following we will use only the reduced
matrix, still designating it by M.
Loops
45. A loop (or circuit) is a sequence of branches bi, b2, ... , be in which ht and
bt+l (i = 1, 2, ... , c, with the cyclic convention c +I= 1) have just one node
in common. Note that this definition implies that a loop is a simply connected
subgraph: any branch and any node is passed at most once, and the loop is
not separable into subloops. A loop is oriented if some positive cyclic order is
defined in the branch sequence. If a graph contains some set of oriented
loops, they can be defined by a loop-to-branch incidence matrix K, where
0 if loop i does not use branch j
{
+ I if loop i contains branch j
and their positive
ktJ = directions coincide (34)
-1 if loop i contains branch j and their positive
directions are opposed
Let x' denote the ith row-vector of K. By (34), a unit current in loop i alone
corresponds to a vector of branch currents which is x. Since a current flowing
in a loop is certainly compatible with the Kirchhoff current constraints, the
vector x satisfies (19), that is, Mx = 0 or x'M' = 0. Since x' is an arbitrary
row-vector of K, one has thus proved KM'= 0, that is, (22). From (20) and
(22) one then deduces (21) as in 27, and the ith equation (21) clearly
expresses that the total voltage drop in loop i is zero.
46. If K has rank m, some m of its row-vectors form linearly independent

current distributions compatible with the Kirchhoff current constraints, and
we will say that these rows define a system of m independent loops. By comparison
with the last result of 43, one has m ~ q. If a graph has zero nullity (q = 0),
the rank of M is equal to the number of branches by (25), and system ( 19)
has no solution other than i = 0. Since m ~ q, one also has m = 0, and the
graph contains no loops; such a graph is called a tree. 6
Loops 23
47. By opening certain branches of a graph, one defines a subgraph. Since

this is equivalent to forcing the corresponding currents to zero, the matrix M
of the subgraph is obtained by deleting certain columns in the matrix M of
the graph, and one has
rank subgraph ::;; rank graph
If the subgraph is a tree, its rank is the number of branches of the subgraph.
The above inequality yields the following theorem: if a tree is a subgraph of a
graph of rank r, it has at most r branches.
48. A matrix is called totally unimodular7 if all its minors of all dimensions
are +I, -1, or 0. The entries themselves are included, as minors of dimen-
sion I. The partition matrix (and the reduced partition matrix) of a connection k-port
is totally unimodular. This is proved by recurrence, starting from the entries
which are known to be ± I or 0. Assume that this also holds for all minors
of dimension k, and consider a minor of dimension k + I. If it has at least
one column containing at most one nonzero entry, its Laplace expansion in
terms of that column shows that it is equal to zero or to some minor of
dimension k. If there is no such column, all columns contain one + 1 and
one -1 entry, the sum of the rows is zero and the minor itself is zero.
49. Let the reduced partition matrix, partitioned as in (23), be bordered by

q = k - r rows to form the square matrix of dimension k
(r) (q)
[~aa Mab] (r)

lq (q)
This matrix is totally unimodular since it contains no essentially new minors.
Its inverse exists, since Maawas assumed nonsingular, and is also totally
unimodular by virtue of A.11. By A.6, the inverse matrix is
[
M-1
aa
0
-NJ lq
where Nis (24). Since -Nis a submatrix of the last matrix, we have proved
that -N, and thus N, is totally unimodular, and, in particular, has entries
± I or 0. In contrast with partition matrices, the number of nonzero entries
per column is, however, not limited. Since the normal forms (31) and (32)
are obtained by bordering Nor N', all normal forms ef topological current- and
voltage-constraint matrices are totally unimodular.
50. If one opens the q = k - r branches corresponding to subscript b, thus

making ib = 0, (27) gives ia = 0, and no currents can flow in the graph.
This shows that the subgraph of branches of subscript a forms a tree. Since
this tree contains r branches and since a larger number is impossible by 47,
the subgraph is called a complete tree. But this subgraph originated from an
arbitrary nonsingular submatrix Maa of dimension r of M; consequently, the
columns of any nonsingular submatrix of dimension r correspond to the
branches of a complete tree. By definition, the remaining q branches form a
cotree. Conversely, if some r branches (of subscript a) form a tree, ib = 0
must imply ia = 0, that is, the equation Maa ia = 0 cannot have a nonzero
solution, and this requires Maa to be nonsingular. All partitions of a reduced
incidence matrix into Maa and Mab, with Maa nonsingular, thus correspond to a
partition of the graph into a complete tree of r branches and a cotree of q = k - r
branches, and conversely. Although the above theorem proves the existence of
at least one complete tree in any graph and furnishes a method for con-
structing it, the following iterative algorithm is more practical: to deduce a
tree oft branches from a tree oft - I branches, add any new branch which
does not produce a loop (some such branch surely exists for t < r, owing to
the above existence theorem); for t = 0, start with any branch.
51. In 45, we assumed, but did not prove, the existence of a certain number
ofloops in a graph; in 46 we proved that the number of independent loops
cannot exceed the nullity. We will now prove that any graph of nullity q
contains at least one system of q independent loops, by constructing this system.
Consider the complete tree corresponding to some normal form in 50 and
add to it one cotree branch (the other cotree branches remain open). The
resulting subgraph is no longer a tree since it has more than r branches, and
therefore contains at least one loop. It contains only one loop because no
loop may remain when one branch (the cotree branch) is opened. The loop
consists of a number of tree branches, forming a connected path through the
tree, linked by the cotree branch (link or chord). The above process generates
as many loops as there are cotree branches (thus q), and all loops are inde-
pendent for they have at least one distinct branch (the link). This completes
the proof. Since the number of independent loops in a graph of nullity q
cannot exceed q, a system of q such loops is called a complete system of inde-
pendent loops, and we have shown how to generate some such systems. As a
corollary, the nullity of a graph is the number of its independent loops.
52. We will now prove that, for the system of loops deduced in 51 from a
given tree-cotree partition, the loop-to-branch incidence matrix is (31). It is
sufficient to show that row j of (31) characterizes the incidence relations of
the loop formed by the jth link and its path in the tree. Note that (27)
determines all tree currents from the cotree currents. If all cotree branches,
except the jth one, are opened, there is only one cotree current; if it is
Loops 25
assumed of unit value, the tree currents are obtained as -nii, thus corre-
sponding to column j of -N, that is, to row j of -N'. Consequently, the
same unit current flows through the link on one hand, and through some
tree branches (corresponding to those ntJ which are ± 1) in well-defined
directions (depending on the sign of niJ) on the other. This shows that the
incidence relations between loop j and the tree branches are characterized
by row j of -N'; moreover, one +
l entry must be added to account for the
link. The obtained incidence pattern is precisely row j of (31), where the
additional + l entry originates from l q.
53. It is often simpler to consider only the path of each loop through the
tree, thus omitting the links. If the paths are numbered and oriented in
accordance with the loops, thejth column of N defines the incidence relation
of the jth path with the tree branches (rows of N). For this reason, N is
called the path-set matrix of the graph.
As an example, we consider the connected graph of Fig. l 5 with 6 nodes
and 9 branches. The rank is 5 and the nullity 4. A tree is shown in full lines
and the cotree is dotted lines. The columns of the N matrix are immediately
read from the paths: 215, 213, 413, and 415. The matrix N is
6 7 8 9
1
2 l 0 0 (35)
3 0 l 0
4 0 0 l
5 0 0
7
_) ►-+--·l.
I \
I-' I \
I
// 2 J
-
''3 \ \
\
I \
, 4" , ,5 \
6fI 9
•t--+--•t
~8
I
I ', / I
\ ' , I
\
,,, ___ .....,,-... ..... ___ .,,,,,,
' , _,, I
Fm. 1.15 j
.
54. A graph is planar if it can be drawn on a plane without branch crossings.

A connected planar graph separates the plane into a number of internal
"Niy,,', 'l,',i)::," lt'7l y,,,:,,:,

,0y,n nt>·nn', ""'npon
n,,oi,
regions and one external region (the sea). The boundary of each region is a
loop. The boundaries cif all internal regions cif a connected planar graph form a
complete system of independent loops. The theorem is obviously true for a graph
with only one internal region which forms a single loop. We prove that if it
is true for an (n - 1)-region graph, it is true for an n-region graph. By
opening a branch in an n-region graph, one forms an (n - 1)-region graph,
having n - I independent loops. By reinserting the opened branch, one
forms a new region whose boundary is independent of the existing loops,
since it contains a new branch. This proves the theorem, since the nullity
of a connected graph cannot increase by more than one when the number
of branches increases by one, the number of nodes remaining constant.
55. A planar graph can also be represented on a sphere. New planar repre-
sentations may then be derived by stereographic projections, and the regions
appearing as internal may be different. Theorem 54 then generates new
systems of loops. The loop-to-branch incidence matrices of the loop systems
produced by theorem 54 are generally not in the normal form (31), and the
loop systems are therefore generally different from the ones generated in 51,
although they reduce to the ones of51 when brought into normal form.
56. In 49, we established that a necessa~y condition for a constraint matrix to be

topological is that it be totally unimodular. We will now show by a counter-example
that this condition is not sufficient. Matrix (35) is totally unimodular, for it has
been derived from a topological constraint matrix. Since the minors of the
transpose matrix are the same, the transpose is also totally unimodular; we
will show, however, that this transpose cannot be the path-set matrix of a
graph. After transposition, rows must correspond to paths; the first row
shows that all four branches of the tree must form a path, thus be in series
in some order; the last four rows show that each branch must be adjacent
to the next and the last to the first; for a set of branches in series, this cyclic
condition can only be met if they form a loop, and this is excluded in a tree.
57. To see whether a given current-constraint matrix is topological or not,

one may always put it in some normal form (32). If N has at most one +l
and one -1 element per column, (32) is topological. If not, one tries to find
a multiplier Maa, transforming (32) into (23), on account of (24), reducing
the excessive ± l entries in the last q columns without generating excessive
± l entries in the first r columns. The number of trial matrices Maa is finite
but enormous, so that such an algebraic method is prohibitive even in
simple cases, and it is more convenient to use a topological approach, as was
done in connection with the last example. Various algorithms have been
devised, which lead either to a graph having N as path-set matrix, or to an
impasse, thus proving the construction to be impossible. 8
Interconnection of subnetworks 27
58. Finally, we prove that the totally unimodular character ef current- or voltage-
constraint matrices expresses the nonamplifying property ef connections. Since the
totally unimodular character is conserved in normal forms, we may reasQn
on the ratio matrix N alone and prove, ab absurdo, that, if N is not totally
unimodular, one may find a state where the connection k-port produces a
current amplification. The proof is by induction on the dimension t of the
minors of N, starting with the entries of N. If some nonzero entry niJ is
different from ±I, one can make all entries of ib equal to zero except i1
and obtain from the ith equation (27), ii= ni1i1; for niJ =ft I, this gives a
current gain from port i to portj (or conversely) in the connection k-port.
The induction part of the proof consists in showing that, if all minors of
dimension <t are ± 1 or 0, and if some nonzero minor of dimension t is
not ±I, then current amplification results. Let Eq. (27) be restricted to the
nonzero minor of dimension t (by setting other entries of ia and ib equal to
zero and deleting the corresponding rows and columns of N) and solved for
the remaining entries of ib. The coefficients of the entries of ia in this solution
are minors of dimension t ~ I of N (all ± I or 0) divided by the minor of
dimension t which was assumed =ft0, =ft ±I. This gives at least one coefficient
#0, #±I in the solution, and this coefficient can be chosen as current ratio
by making other entries equal to zero.
Interconnection of subnetworks
59. The difference between true n-ports, and subnetworks behaving as
n-ports in certain surroundings, was explained in 4, and equivalence between
n-ports was defined in 6. One must be careful not to use the equivalence
between subnetworks behaving as n-ports in environmental conditions where
such a behavior is not ensured. As an example, consider the ideal transformer
2-port of ratio n = I. Its equations are i1 + i2 = 0, v1 = v2 and they are
identical to the equations of the subnetwork of Fig. 16, when this sub-
network behaves as a 2-port. The transformer and the subnetwork of Fig. 16
are thus equivalent as 2-ports; these subnetworks are, however, not equivalent
as 4-terminal subnetworks, for all nonport voltages are undetermined in a
transformer (as in the inductance 2-port from which the ideal transformer
10------02 1 2
1'0--------0 2. 1' 2'

Fm. 1.16 Fm. 1.17
has been derived), but equal to zero or to port voltages in Fig. 16. Similarly,
for n = -I, the ideal transformer is equivalent to the subnetwork of Fig. 17,
as 2-port, but not as 4-terminal subnetwork. This means that these subnet-
works cannot be replaced by each other in all surroundings: for instance, if a
ground connection is made between terminals l' and 2' of a transformer of
ratio -1, its 2-port equations are not altered; on the other hand, the same
connection in Fig. 17 shorts all terminals, and the 2-port equations are
changed into vi= v2 = 0.
60. Similar precautions must be taken when several subnetworks are inter-
connected, since each one is then surrounded by the others; before treating
the component subnetworks as n-ports (i.e., using their equations), the whole
system must generally be examined to see whether n-port behavior is ensured
for every component in the new environment. As an example of a difficulty
which may arise, consider the 2-ports A and B of Fig. 18 of ports I, 2, and
3
r
I
-1- --
I
I -- --, I
I 1' 3' I
A I
I I B
2 4 I
I
L-- -- -
I
I
-
,.. __ ....,I
I
I I
2 4
FIG. 1.18
3, 4, respectively. If both A and B are true 2-ports, the interconnection of

Fig. 18 introduces the voltage constraints v1 = v3 and v2 = v4. If, however,
A and B are 4-terminal subnetworks and contain the nonport galvanic con-
nections shown in dotted lines, all four ports are effectively paralleled by the
interconnection, and the result is v1 = v2 = V3 = V4. Note that the difficulty
does not arise if the nonport internal connection exists in only one of the
subnetworks; the other one is then a true n-port and imposes n-port behavior
to the first subnetwork. This was the case in 36 where the elements (which
are true 2-ports or n-ports) imposed their behavior to the connection k-port.
61. Any interconnection of ideal tran.iformer ni-ports is an ideal tran.iformer n-port.

The theorem does not state, however, that the resulting subnetwork is a
true n-port, so that it can only be used when the n-port behavior is ensured
by the surroundings. Let Mi be the current-constraint matrices of the
separate nt-ports before their interconnection. The set of nt-ports can be con-
sidered as a single na-port with na = L ni, whose current-constraint matrix
is Ma= M1 + M2 +···,and which may thus be called the direct sum of the
component nt-ports. The final n-port is obtained by plugging the na-port into
a socket under which all connections have been prepared as in Fig. 14.
Moreover, some terminal pairs remain free to form the ports of the inter-
connected subnetwork. Since the transformer na-port is a true na-port, it
imposes na-port behavior on the connection subnetwork, and the current-
constraints in this subnetwork are expressed by some constraint matrix Mb.
Let i be the current vector entering the transformer na-port; since the same
current vector leaves the connection na-port, one must have simultaneously
The current vector i can be partitioned into irx, whose entries are the currents
at the free ports of the resulting n-port, and ip forming the internal currents
in the interconnecting pairs of wires. By eliminating ip between the above
equations, one obtains a system of the form Mirx = 0 which constitutes the
current equations of the final n-port. Note that the elimination is always
possible: if some entry of ip appears (with nonzero coefficients) in more than
one equation, one of these is solved to serve for the elimination into the
others, and is then disregarded; if some entry of ip appears in one equation
only, that equation is merely disregarded. The elimination of every entry
then consumes one equation; if no equation is left, irx is arbitrary. A similar
process can be applied to the voltage equations of the nt-ports and of the
connection na-port, and here also, after eliminating the voltages vp at the
interconnections one obtains some relations (possibly vacuous) of the form
Kvrx = 0 between the port voltages of the final n-port. On the other hand,
every component nt-port, and the connection na-port, conserve instantaneous
power; by addition, this also holds true for the interconnected n-port. This
n-port is, then, an ideal transformer n-port, by the converse theorem of 34.
The particular cases where no current constraint or no voltage constraint is
left were discussed in 35.
62. It is interesting to see, in particular, how the constraint matrices of an

ideal transformer n-port are modified when some windings are opened or
short-circuited by the connections. Since the normal forms of K and M are
related through N, one may work with either of these matrices alone,
according to convenience. In the case of open ports, all windings in series
with these ports are simply omitted, and this suppresses the corresponding
columns of Min ( 19); if the rank of the resulting submatrix is smaller than
the original rank, redundant rows are suppressed, and the final current-
constraint matrix is the submatrix so obtained. In the opposite case where
some ports are short-circuited, the corresponding columns of K can simply

be omitted in Eq. (21). If the rank of the resulting matrix is smaller than the
original rank, redundant rows are suppressed, and the submatrix so obtained
is the voltage-constraint matrix of the final network. Any interconnection
of ideal transformers can be simplified by alternate application of these rules.
63. Consider a transformer n-port of rank r whose r shunt ports are each
closed on a strictly positive inductance. The values Ak of the inductances
form a diagonal matrix A of dimension r. The situation is represented in
Fig. 19. The equations of the r inductances Ak can be combined into the
matrix equation Va= -A dia/dt (with a change of sign since the currents ia
entering the n-port leave the inductances). Eliminating ia and Va with (27)
and (30), one obtains Vb= N'AN dib/dt. This shows that the resulting q-port,
whose q = n - r ports are the series ports of the transformer network, is an
inductance q-port of inductance matrix
L=N'AN (36)
It is clear (by reference to Fig. 9) that the nonport voltages remain undeter-
mined since no galvanic connections have been introduced between ports;
thus the network is a true q-port.
64. Conversely, by A.37, any symmetric positive definite matrix L of dimen-

sion q and rank r can be transformed into a diagonal matrix A+ Oq-r, with
A strictly positive definite of dimension r, by a congruence transformation T.
With the partition
(q)
(r)
T= [:;] (q -r)
b
a
" 1r, N
a'
b'
Fm. 1.19
one has
and (36) is established. In conclusion, any inductance q-port ef rank r is equivalent

to an ideal transformer ( q + r )-port of rank r closed on r inductances.
65. The equivalent circuit of an inductance 2-port immediately results from
(A.45) and (A.46). With the notations
(37)
introduced in 20 and 21, and since n has the sign of L12, one has
(38)
Thus
(39)
and
t] (40)
The resulting 2-port is shown in Fig. 20 and can obviously be simplified into
Fig. 21 if transformers of unit ratios are replaced by straight connections as
in Fig. 16. The element A2 is the leakage inductance as seen from port 2.
1 2
A,Of I
1
A2 011 II
1' 2'
Fm. 1.20
II
1'u----
FIG. 1.21
Kirchhoff networks
66. Network theory inherits from electromagnetic theory the following cata-
logue of conventional elements: positive resistances, positive capacitances,
systems of self- and mutual inductances with symmetric positive definite
inductance matrices, voltage generators, and current generators. In addition,
the concept of ideal transformer has been introduced as a limiting case and
has proved useful. Any interconnection of a finite number of such elements
in accordance with Kirchhoff laws is called a Kirchhoff network. In accordance
with 64, every physical system of self- and mutual inductances can be re-
placed by a combination of ideal transformers and 2-port inductances.
Inductance n-ports thus become redundant in the catalogue and need no
longer be considered. What is left is some number k of 2-port elements on
one hand, and connections and ideal transformers on the other. As in 36,
the elements are assumed to be plugged into a set of 2-terminal sockets,
whereas the connections and transformers form some 2k-terminal subnetwork
under the board. Since the k elements form a true k-port (the direct sum of
the elements), they impose k-port behavior on the subnetwork under the
board; by 61, this subnetwork is thus equivalent to an ideal transformer
k-port. At the end of this process, the network appears as some ideal trans-
former k-port (under the board) closed on k separate one-port elements
(above the board). In such a standard form (which is not unique), power is
supplied, stored, or dissipated in the elements, whereas its distribution between the
elements is ruled by the constraints. Moreover, if the transformer k-port is assumed
to be realized in the form of Fig. 8 (which is perfectly general and treats all
ports equally), the network contains no connections other than the ones by
which the elements are plugged into the sockets. Although the replacement
of connections by ideal transformers may appear to be a complication (and
will, in fact, not be used in the analysis of networks without transformers),
the adoption of the standard form simplifies considerably the proof of many
Kirchhoff networks 33
general theoretical properties, because all topological considerations dis-

appear.
67. In the standard form of a Kirchhoff network, the elements R, L, Care

positive, but there is no loss in generality in supposing them finite and
strictly positive. An element of zero or infinite value (short or open circuit)
is, in fact, a constraint and can be brought under the board and combined
with the ideal transformer subnetwork. As an additional standardization,
each R, L, or C element may be assumed to have a unit value; this is simply
achieved by multiplying by a suitable factor all the windings of the trans-
former k-port in series with the element to be normalized.
The combination of short circuits with ideal transformers may produce
isolated short-circuited loops under the board. For instance, if a short circuit
above the board is closed on a short circuit under the board, the loop thus
produced is brought entirely under the board in the standard form and is
no longer accessible at the sockets and thus is ignored in the network descrip-
tion, although the current in this loop is indeterminate. If the loop is first
considered as having some small nonzero resistance R and inductance L, its
current is i(t) = io exp(-rx.t) with rx. = -R/L; since rx. may tend to any value,
and since i 0 is arbitrary, the physical situation is indeed indeterminate. A
similar situation occurs when both windings of an ideal transformer 2-port
are shorted: the currents in the primary and secondary loops are in the
ratio n, but otherwise indeterminate. On the other hand, a port which is
open-circuited both above and under the board, or a transformer with both
windings open, produces a situation where a voltage remains indeterminate.
All such isolated indeterminate subnetworks have no interaction with the
remaining determinate part of the network and are rightly ignored in the
standard form.
68. A concrete n-port built out of the conventional elements mentioned in 66

will be called a Kirchhoff n-port. A Kirchhoff n-port can be brought into
standard form by the following procedure: form a Kirchhoff network by
terminating the ports of the Kirchhoff n-port on arbitrary 2-port elements,
transform the Kirchhoff network thus produced into its standard form (this
does not alter the added elements), unplug the terminations. A Kirchhoff
n-port in standard form thus differs from a Kirchhoff network only in that
some of the windings of the transformer k-port under the board are ter-
minated on free ports rather than on elements. Since each free port is thus
galvanically isolated, a Kirchhoff n-port in standard form is always a true
n-port. In the theory of n-ports, it is customary to exclude generators as
internal elements; this is merely a question of methodology, since it is always
possible to add generators at the free ports, and this restriction will be
accepted, without further mention, in the future. With this convention, any
Kirchhoff n-port can be considered as a Kirchhoff network in which generators have
been replaced by ports.
69. We have seen in 59-60 that interconnections of subnetworks are some-

times not correctly described by the n-port equations if some of the inter-
connected subnetworks are not true n-ports. The n-port concept gains its
full interest only if it can be freely used, that is, if the external behavior is
correctly described by the n-port equations in all surroundings, and this is
precisely achieved by the standard form. Note that true n-port behavior
could also be ensured by inserting separate transformers of unit ratio at
each port. As for the n-port behavior, these transformers are equivalent to
straight connections (Fig. 16), but all galvanic connections between terminals
belonging to different ports become isolated inside the subnetwork.
70. In accordance with 66, our catalogue of elements contains various kinds
of 2-port elements and only one kind of n-port element, the ideal transformer
n-port. On the other hand, the connections have been reduced to utmost
simplicity, since they only appear as insertions of 2-terminal plugs into 2-
terminal sockets. In 24----26, the ideal transformer n-port has been generated
as a series-parallel interconnection of ideal transformer 2-ports, and the
catalogue of elements may be restricted accordingly, at the price of a
complication in the type of connections. This means that network theory
can be axiomatized in two different ways, and the choice is a matter of
taste. The ideal transformer is, however, a basic element in all presentations
of the theory and is unavoidable unless mutual inductances are excluded
altogether, because there is no natural bound which could be imposed to
inductance values and coupling coefficients so as to exclude the limiting
case of infinite perfectly coupled inductances. In that sense, the ideal trans-
former plays a role similar to the one of ideal elements in projective geom-
etry. In addition, its isolating property permits the change of any terminal
pair into a true port and thus gives its full value to the n-port concept.
71. The accessible variables (currents and voltages at the ports) of an n-port
are 2n in number. The number of equations relating the variables and charac-
terizing the admissible state of then-port has, however, not been stated. We
now remark that this number has been n in all n-ports encountered in this
chapter. All one-port elements (including generators) were defined by a
single equation. The number of Eqs. (3) was n for an inductance n-port.
For a transformer k-port, the number of independent current constraints (19)
is the rank r of M, whereas the number of independent voltage constraints
in (21) is the rank of K, which is the nullity k - r of the k-port, by 32 and (25);
Kirchoff networks 35
this gives a total of k equations, for the voltage equations are, obviously,
independent of the current equations. The same result holds for a connection
k-port as a particular case. We finally note that when several ni-ports
are simply juxtaposed without interconnections to form an n-port with
n= L ni (the direct sum of the component ni-ports), the equations of the
n-port are the union of the equations of the ni-ports, which are clearly
mutually independent since they relate distinct variables. Consequently,
any n-port deduced by juxtaposition from ni-ports encountered in this
chapter is characterized by n equations. Finally, note that all equations
were homogeneous in the port variables, except the ones defining generators.
Since, in 68, generators were excluded as constituents of n-ports, the equations
characterizing a concrete n-port are homogeneous.
chapter 2
Network analysis
The network equations

1. In 1.66 it was established that any Kirchhoff network could be trans-
formed into a standard form consisting of an ideal transformer k-port closed
on k separate one-port elements. The electrical state of a Kirchhoff network
is described in terms of the 2k variables (k currents and k voltages) at the
ports of the transformer k-p9rt. In accordance with 1.71, the transformer
k-port is characterized by k equations. Similarly, the direct sum of the k
elements is characterized by k equations between the same 2k port variables.
To conclude, one has obtained a system of 2k network equations in 2k port
variables.
Although the k constraint equations are linearly independent, and
although the k element equations are also linearly independent, it may
happen that the two sets of equations are not independent with respect to
each other. Examples of such a situation were already given in 1.67. On the
other hand, the network equations may be incompatible. This occurs, for
instance, if a voltage generator is short-circuited. Similarly, if separate voltage
generators e1 and e 2 are applied at the ports of an ideal transformer of ratio
n, the system
is incompatible for e2 =I= ne1, and indeterminate for e2 = ne1 (one equation is
missing and the currents are indeterminate).
2. If the ideal elements of the last example are replaced by the actual
physical devices of which they are idealizations (coupled inductances oflarge
36
The network equations 37
but finite value and nearly perfect coupling, generators with small but non-
zero internal resistance), additional parameters and variables are introduced,
which suppress the incompatibility or the indetermination. It is a general
methodological principle of mathematical physics to consider that all actual
physical systems have a well-defined behavior; consequently, whenever
theoretical models are incompatible or indeterminate, they are simply in-
adequate idealizations of no interest. This justifies our decision to consider
only well-defined networks; by definition, the number of independent equations
of such a network is equal to the number of electrical variables, and the
equations are compatible. However, this raises the problem of finding the
necessary and sufficient conditions for a Kirchhoff network to be well defined.
These conditions will be progressively obtained in 19 and 27-28.
3. The equations of a Kirchhoff network in standard form are obtained by

juxtaposing the equations of the elements and of the transformer k-port. The
equations of the reactive elements (capacitances and inductances) are differ-
ential of the first order, whereas the equations of the resistances and trans-
formers are algebraic. All equations have real constant coefficients, and are
homogeneous in the absence of generators. If one denotes by p the operator
d/dt, the coefficients of the variables in the system of differential equations
become real polynomials in p of, at most, degree one. Let x be the vector of
+
the port variables,.ft1 = paii bi; the coefficient of x; in the ith equation, and
y the vector of the second members which are generator currents or voltages;
the differential system in matrix form is
Fx=y (1)
with
(2)
4. In many cases, the system of differential equations arising from the net-
work standard form can be considerably simplified by inspection, for the
algebraic elimination of some variables is trivial. On the other hand, capaci-
tance voltages and inductance currents appear under the differentiation
operator and cannot be eliminated without integration, unless some linear
algebraic relations among these variables are produced by the resistance,
transformer, or generator equations. We will call state variables any irreducible
set of variables appearing under the differentiation operator. State variables
are linearly independent among themselves; otherwise a further reduction
of the set by algebraic elimination would be possible. Consequently, the state
variables are a linearly independent selection among the capacitance voltages and the
inductance currents.I The number of state variables may actually be smaller
than the total number of reactive elements: for instance, the currents in two
inductances connected in series are identical.
38 2. Network analysis
After the reduction process, the set of differential equations is still of the
form ( 1, 2), and F is square and not identically singular for a well-defined
network. Moreover, the dimension m of Fis the number of state variables, and
A is nonsingular (unless m = 0): if A had rank r < m, one could multiply (I)
by some constant nonsingular matrix to reduce to zero the last m - r rows of
A, thus making the last m - r equations ( 1) purely algebraic and allowing a
further reduction. Where m = 0, one has, of course, A = 0, and all equations
are purely algebraic. This occurs, for instance, in a network containing only
resistances and transformers. At the end of the reduction process, the vector x
in (I) is thus the vector of the state variables; on the other hand, the vector y
is a linear combination of the generator currents and voltages and, possibly,
of their derivatives of various orders. In any case, in the absence of generators,
the system reduces to
Fx=O (3)
5. The network equations ( l) are linear differential with constant real coefficients.
Their general solution is the sum of the general solution of the homogeneous
system (3) (general free solution) and of a particular solution of (I) (forced
solution). Once the values of the state variables are known, the remaining
algebraic equations (disregarded in the reduced system) determine uniquely
the nonstate variables in a well-defined network. Finally, in (3), det Fis a real
polynomial in p of degree m, equal to the dimension of F and to the number
of state variables, called the degree of the network.
Free solutions
6. The linear differential system (3) of order m, equal to the degree of det F,
has exactly m linearly independent solution vectors. These m vectors, of m
entries each, form the columns of a square matrix U(t), and the general
solution vector x(t) of (3) is a linear combination, with some arbitrary
coefficients ai (i = 1, 2, ... , m) of the column vectors of U. This gives
x = Ua, where a is the m-vector of entries ai. Since U is nonsingular, the
equation x = Ua, written at t = 0, can be solved for a, and the m integration
constants (entries of a) are determined by the initial values of the state
variables (initial conditions). Consequently, the number of state variables, the
degree of the network, and the number of independent initial conditions are
identical.
7. The homogeneous system (3) is classically discussed by investigating

solutions of the form x = XePt, where Xis a constant vector. For an identical
exponential time dependence of all variables, the differential system (3)
Free solutions 39
becomes an algebraic system, where Fis a polynomial matrix in p. A solution

X cf- 0 exists if detF(p) = 0. For a well-defined network detF(p) only
vanishes at a finite number of zeros Pt (the characteristic roots), and their total
number is equal to the network degree m. To each characteristic root Pi
corresponds at least one nonzero solution vector Xi, but the total number of
linearly independent solution vectors thus obtained cannot be assessed with-
out a deeper analysis.
8. The equivalence theory of polynomial matrices of A.69-79 permits one to

transform (3) into various equivalent forms (by which the properties of the
solution will be discussed more easily). This transformation results from the
following fundamental theorem: the differential systems Fx = 0 and TFx = 0 are
equivalent (i.e., admit the same solutions) ijf Tis unimodular. All solutions of
Fx = 0 clearly satisfy TFx = 0. Conversely, with Fx = y, the systems become
y = 0 and Ty = 0, and the unique solution of the second system is y = 0 only
if det T = 0 has no roots in p, thus i_f this determinant is nonzero and constant.
9. Since F is not identically singular, there exists, by A.76, a unimodular

matrix T such that TF = H is in Hermite normal form. 2 System (3) then
becomes the equivalent system
Hx=0 (4)
where H is upper triangular, so that det H is the product of its diagonal
entries. The zeros of det H and det F are identical.
In many cases, the transformation of a polynomial matrix in an upper-
triangular form is almost trivial (this happens, in particular, when the minors
of Fare polynomials without common factors). Consider, for instance, the
series RLC circuit where the state variables are the capacitance voltage Ve and
the inductance current h. Equations (3) are
[RiLp -lJ [iL]

Cp Ve
=O
and one has
Cp ]
-LCp 2 -RCp -1
This example also shows that the degrees of the entries of Hare not generally
restricted to the values 0 and l, as it was the case for F.
10. Let Pt be an mt-pie zero of det H(p). Due to the triangular form of H, the
nullity nt of H(pi) is at least one and at most mi, the maximum nullity
mt being reached if Pt is a simple zero of mi distinct diagonal entries of H(Pt),
This gives at most mi independent vectors Xi associated with each distinct

characteristic root Pi, hence a total of n < L
mt = m independent solution
vectors of (4). If the nullity of H(Pt) is exactly the maximum nullity mt at
each Pt, the total number of independent solution vectors is m, for the vectors
associated to different characteristics roots Pt and PJ are independent, due
to the independent factors ePtt and eP1t. In such a case (and this is certainly
so if all characteristic roots are simple), we have found the general solution
discussed in 6. If, however, the nullity of some H(pi) is ni <mi, some mi - ni
solution vectors associated with Pi are still missing.
11. The simplest case where one solution is missing is the equation
(p -Po) 2x = 0 (5)
where Po is a double zero of the determinant, whereas the nullity is only one,
so there is only one exponential free solution ePot. The equation
(p - Pi) (p - P2)x = O (6)
of which (5) is a particular case, has, however, two independent solutions

eP1t and eP2t, and the missing solution of (5) may be found by examining
the limiting case Pi =Po, P2 = Po +
e with e tending to zero. The linear
combination
eP2t - eP1t ePot(ett - 1)
(7)
h-Pi s
is a solution of (6) for any e =I- 0. Fore tending to zero, it tends to t ePot which
is independent of ePo t and thus constitutes the second solution of (5). Conse-
quently, the general solution of (5) is
(a+ bt)ePot
More generally, one easily checks by direct substitution, that x = f(t)ePot,

wheref(t) is an arbitrary polynomial of degree n - I, satisfies the equation
(p - p0 ) nx = 0; since this solution is the combination of n independent solu-
tions (the terms tk ePot), it is the general solution. Solutions of this type
(involving exponentials multiplied by polynomials) are called secular. Finally,
the general solution of a differential equation of the form
(8)
IS
wherefi(t) is an arbitrary polynomial of degree rt - I.

Stability 41
12. In the case of multiple roots, the general system (3) is most easily
treated by reducing F to its Smith canonical form by F = PEQ, with P and Q
unimodular. System (3) is equivalent to EQx = 0, by 8. With Qx = z, the
system becomes Ez = 0, and all equations are separated and of the form (8).
From the solution vector z thus obtained, xis deduced by x = Q- 1 z; since
Q- 1 is polynomial in p = d/dt, this only involves differentiations.
13. As a consequence of 7-12, the general solution of (3) is a linear com-

bination of elementary solutions of the form
x(t) = atk ePt (9)
where a is a constant vector, where pis a characteristic root, and where k is a
nonnegative integer. Since the characteristic roots ofa real polynomial matrix
may be complex, the solutions obtained in 7-11 are apparently complex, but
conjugate solutions can be combined in pairs to produce real free solutions: if
x(t) is a free solution, so is x*(t) for a differential system with real coefficients.
In any case, real solutions are thus ensured by the reality of the initial
conditions. For real characteristic roots, (9) is real with a. For a complex
+
characteristic root p = oc jw, (9) must be combined with its conjugate. With
ai = bi ei"'i, this yields a vector of entries
(10)
In both cases (9) and ( I 0), an elementary real solution vector is of the form
x(t) = X(t)eat ( 11)
where the absolute values of the entries of the vector X( t) increase with time
at most as some power oft.
Stability
14. Consider a Kirchhoff network containing generators; designate by Wg the
total instantaneous power delivered by the generators, by wa the total power
dissipated in the resistances, and by Te and Tm the total instantaneous
electric and magnetic energies, stored in the capacitances and the induc-
tances, respectively. Denote by T = Te+ Tm the total stored energy. Since
ideal transformers conserve instantaneous power, one has
dT
Wg=wa+- ( I 2)
dt
thus
J; wg dt = J~ wa dt + T - To ( 13)
where T 0 is the initial value of T.

For a network without generators (thus, in particular, for the free solu-
tions), one has Wg = 0, hence
f~wadt + T= To (14)
Since wa is essentially nonnegative, ( 14) becomes

T< To ( 15)
and, in particular, T cannot increase indefinitely with time.
15. Since the values of the inductances and the capacitances associated with
the state variables (entries of x) have been normalized to unity in the standard
form, the total electromagnetic energy due to the state variables is x' x/2; since
some electromagnetic energy may, in addition, be stored in other reactive
elements, one has, for an elementary free solution of the type ( 11),
2T>x'x = e2 atX'X ( 16)
Since X 'Xis strictly positive, ( 16) only vanishes for X = 0. As a consequence,
( 16) is certainly decreasing with time for Ol < 0 and increasing for Ol > 0. This
already excludes all characteristic roots with positive real parts (thus in the
right half-plane of the complex variable p). For Ol = 0, ( 16) is increasing if
some entry of X contains a polynomial in t, that is, for a secular solution.
Secular solutions are thus excluded for purely imaginary characteristic roots.
By IO, this means that the nullity of Hat a multiple purely imaginary zero of
det H must be equal to the multiplicity of that zero.
16. A physical system whose free solutions cannot increase indefinitely with
time is stable. We have thus proved that a well-defined Kirchhoff network is stable.
The method of proof shows that this property is essentially a consequence of
the power invariance in the constraints and of the positive character of the
elements. Positive resistances are necessary to establish wa > 0, and this is
essential to deduce (15) from (14). On the other hand, only strictly positive
reactive elements can be normalized to unit values, and this is necessary in
order to produce a strictly positive definite quadratic form in ( 16) ; if the
quadratic form could vanish for some X cf- 0, the sign of Ol would become
irrelevant, and the control on the increase with time disappears.
17. Except for a constant factor, the determinants of Hand Fare equal, and
are equal to the determinant of the complete system of network equations
(including nonstate variables), since every algebraic elimination is equivalent
to a linear transformation by means of a constant (thus unimodular) matrix.
One can thus speak of the network determinant, a polynomial whose zeros are the
characteristic roots defining the free solutions. Similarly, the nullity of a matrix is
Stability 43
invariant with respect to transformations of constant determinant, and one

can speak of the nullity of the network matrix. We have established the
following properties for the determinant of a Kirchhoff network: (a) the
network determinant has no zeros in the right half-plane; (b) if the network determinant
has a zero of multiplicity s on the imaginary axis, the network matrix has exactly
nullity s at this zero.
18. A network without generators cannot be incompatible, for the homogen-

eous equations (3) always admit the solution x = 0. It can, however, be in-
determinate if det F(p) vanishes identically. Let r < m be the normal rank of
F(p). With the notations of 12, the Smith form E of Fis Ea+ Om-r, where Ea
has normal rank r. The solution vector z of the network equations Ez = 0
separates into a subvector Za (the first r entries of z) satisfying Ea Za = 0
and a subvector Zb (the last m - r entries of z) whose entries are arbitrary
functions of time. The vector x = Q- 1 z of the state variables similarly decom-
+
poses into x = Xa Xb, where xa(xb) depends only on Za(zb), The part Xa
of the solution is similar to the general free solution of a well-defined network
and is stable, so the characteristic roots (zeros of Ea) have nonpositive real
parts. If the arbitrary functions involved in the part Xb are chosen increasing
with time, ( 14) is violated unless one has wa = T = 0. This means that the
corresponding currents cannot flow in the RL elements and that the corre-
sponding voltages cannot appear across the CC elements. The arbitrary
currents thus flow only in short-circuited loops and the arbitrary voltages
appear only at isolated open terminal pairs. Since the arbitrary solutions
produce no currents in the inductances and no voltages across the capaci-
tances, they are not excited by the initial conditions.
19. Isolated loops and open terminal pairs have been excluded from the
network description in its standard form, in 1.67. When a network containing
generators is analyzed, its standard form is established taking these generators
into account. In the analysis of free solutions, however, Eqs. ( 1) are replaced
by the homogeneous system (3), and this is equivalent to replacing voltage
and current generators by short circuits and open circuits, respectively; the
homogeneous network thus defined is no longer necessarily in standard form,
so that isolated loops and open ports may reappear. Indeterminate behavior
of a homogeneous network can thus be excluded by placing certain restric-
tions on the generator connections within the complete network. On the
other hand, incompatibility can also only be produced by generators. In
conclusion, one must be able to express the necessary and sufficient conditions
for a Kirchhoff network in standard form to be well defined exclusively
in terms of restrictions on generator connections. This will be done in
27-28.
20. A Kirchhoff network containing no resistances is called lossless or non-

dissipative. One thus has wa = 0. Since Wg = 0 for the free solutions, ( 13)
gives T = To, so the free solutions can neither increase nor decrease with
time. As a consequence, all characteristic roots ef a lossless Kirchhoff network are
purely imaginary. Note that multiple imaginary roots are allowed, provided
they do not lead to solutions involving polynomials in t. For instance, in the
bridge network of Fig. 1, a current flowing in one of the capacitances does
Fm. 2.1
not flow in the other capacitance, owing to the bridge balance. If one
capacitance is opened, the inductance bridge reduces to a single inductance
L, and the zeros of the resulting series resonant circuit are p = ±j/(LC) 112 ;
reasoning similarly on the second capacitance, one obtains the same zeros
which are thus double.
21. For a general Kirchhoff network, the real parts of the characteristic
roots are negative or zero. Negative real parts correspond to free solutions
decreasing with time, thus to true transients. Zero real parts correspond to
permanent oscillations, and all free solutions are of this type in the nondissipative
case. Permanent oscillations may also occur in dissipative networks, for it may
happen that the currents of a particular free solution do not flow in the
resistances; this occurs, for instance, in the network deduced from Fig. 1 by
replacing one of the capacitances by a resistance.
Forced solutions
22. We return to the inhomogeneous system ( 1) and discuss forced solutions.
A consequence of the linearity of the system is the superposition principle: if Xa
and Xb are, respectively, solutions of ( 1) with ya andyb as second member, then
Xa +
Xb is a solution corresponding to the second member Ya +Yb. This
enables one to obtain a solution of ( 1) as a linear combination of solutions
Forced solutions 45
corresponding to particularly simple forms of the second member. When all

entries ofy have an identical time dependence of the form ePt, with p real or
complex, thus for y = YePt with a constant vector Y, the solution is generally
of the same form x = Xept: the differential system reduces to the algebraic
system FX = Y, where Fis a polynomial matrix with p replacing d/ dt, and the
solution is X = F- 1 Y, if <let F =I= 0, and thus if p does not coincide with a
characteristic root. The case of confluence can be treated as in 11-12 and
may lead to secular solutions. For instance, in the simplest case where a
coincidence may occur, the differential equation of the first order
dx
- - p 0 x = aePot ( 17)
dt
a particular forced solution is
x = atePot ( I 8)
as can be easily checked by substitution. More generally, by A.29, the
algebraic system FX = Y is compatible if
rank F = rank [F, Y] at Po (19)
and a purely exponential particular solution then exists. In the opposite case,
the algebraic system is incompatible, and the particular solution is secular.
Consider now the case of an ill-defined network where F has normal rank
r < m. With the notations of 12, Eq. (1) becomes PEQx = y, or Ez = P- 1y.
The last m - r equations impose the value O to the last m - r entries of the
vector P-1,y, and the system is compatible iff the generators satisfy these
conditions. In the case of compatibility, the first r equations contain only
the first r entries of z and can be solved to obtain the particular solution. A
particular solution of (I) is then obtained by x = Q- 1 z, where the last m - r
entries of z are zero. For an exponential time dependence of all generators,
the particular solution is also exponential, except possibly for some discrete
values of p (zeros of the submatrix Ea, of dimension r of E) where secular
solutions may appear.
23. The important case where all the variables are synchronous harmonic
functions of the form bi cos(wt +</>i), is deduced from the exponential case
by considering this expression as the real part of bi ei'P1efrot = Xi eirot, where
Xi= biei, is the complex amplitude. When (1) is transformed into an algebraic
system, the entries of the vectors X and Y are thus allowed complex values.
The case of general periodic excitation is deduced from the harmonic case by
expanding data and unknowns in Fourier series. In the case of arbitrary time
dependence, the general solution can be found by the techniques of the
Fourier integral of the Laplace transformation, without explicitly separating
free and forced solutions.
24. With the exception of secular solutions, it thus appears that for both free
and forced solutions, the differential system is essentially discussed by reducing
it to an algebraic system, by means of the substitution of p to d/dt and of the
complex amplitude vectors X and Y to the instantaneous vectors x(t) and
y(t). Once this is recognized, it becomes unnecessary to distinguish explicitly
by different notations the differential system F(d/dt)x(t) = y(t) from the
algebraic system F(p)X = Y. In the following, when dealing with algebraic
systems, we will denote by x andy (instead of X and Y) the amplitudes of the
electrical variables, that is, the vector coefficients of ePt; with this notation, the
true electrical variables are xePt andyePt instead of the variables x andy used
in differential systems. In fact, most of the subsequent developments deal only
with such exponential states (free or forced) of (generalized)frequency p; instead of
states xePt,yePt we will thus speak of states (x,y) at frequency p. Since F(p) is a
polynomial matrix with real coefficients, (x*,y*) is then a state at frequency
p*. A harmonic state (or steady state) corresponds to a purely imaginary value
jw of p. An exponential free state is a state (x, 0) at a frequency p which is a
zero of the network determinant.
25. In accordance with 1.68, a Kirchhoff network becomes a Kirchhoff

n-port if generators are replaced by ports. In the complete form (I) of the
network equations, some entries of the vector x are port variables, whereas the
remaining entries are internal variables. The algebraic treatment of the
exponential states of24 is onlyjusti:fied if all variables (accessible and internal)
are purely exponential. It may happen that a state which is purely exponen-
tial at all ports necessarily produces secular terms in some internal variables;
the state of the network as a whole, then, is not purely exponential, and the
algebraic treatment is invalid. Such a state (where polynomials only appear
in the internal variables) is called internally secular; the state remains, however,
exponential at the ports. We will now prove that a Kirchhoff n-port has no internally
secular states in Re p > 0. In accordance with 22, secular states can only
appear at discrete values of p coinciding with characteristic roots. Since these
are restricted to Rep< 0 by the stability condition, secular states in Rep> 0
are excluded altogether, but may occur in Rep= 0. It remains to prove that
the secular states in Rep= 0 cannot be internal, and this is done by showing
that such states violate ( 13) : the first member is periodic, whereas the second
member is not periodic even if only one electrical variable contains poly-
nomials in t, a cancellation between various terms being impossible since
wa and Tare positive definite.
26. By analogy with 20, a Kirchhoff n-port containing no resistances is called

lossless. A lossless Kirchhoff n-port has no internally secular states. Such states in
Forced solutions 47
Rep > 0 have already been excluded in 25; secular states in Rep < 0 are
impossible since all characteristic roots of a lossless network have been
restricted to Rep = 0 in 20.
27. We now derive the necessary and sufficient conditions for well-defi,ned Kirchhoff
networks. We assume the network to be given in standard form and, owing to
19, we investigate only the restrictions to be imposed on the generators. By
the superposition principle, voltage and current generators can be treated
separately, and we first consider voltage generators alone. Let M be the
current-constraint matrix of the transformer k-port under the board, ME the
submatrix of M formed by the columns corresponding to the windings in
series with the voltage generators, u the vector of the voltages per turn, and
e the voltage vector of the generators. The system (1.20) restricted to the
generator voltages is then ME u = e. Let KE be some matrix such that
KEME = O; one deduces KEe = 0 and this imposes some linear relations
between the generators, unless KE= 0. A relation between generators leads
to incompatibility if the given generators do not satisfy that relation, and to
indetermination otherwise (one generator is then redundant, and one equa-
tion is missing after its suppression). Consequently, the network is only well
defined if KE= 0. This means that KE has zero rank, hence ME zero nullity.
The normal form (1.26) of ME then reduces to
(20)
where r is the number of voltage generators. This means that voltage generators
must be connected at shunt ports of the transformer k-port.
28. The treatment of current generators is similar, but based on the voltage
constraint matrix K of the transformer k-port. The current equations of the
transformer can be written i = K 'x in terms of this matrix, x being an
arbitrary vector. This is proved by showing that the known current equation
(1.19) results when xis eliminated, using the transpose of (1.22). Let KJ be
the submatrix of K formed by the columns corresponding to ports connected
to current generators, andj the vector of the generator currents. The corre-
sponding rows ofi = K'x give the equationsj = KJx. Let MJ be some matrix
such that MJKJ = O; one deduces MJj = 0, and this imposes some linear
relations between the generators, unless MJ = 0. As above, this means that
MJ must have zero rank, hence KJ zero nullity. The normal form of KJ is
then (20), where r is the number of current generators, and current generators
must be connected at series ports. In 27 and 28, the concepts of shunt (series) ports
should be interpreted in accordance with the last remark of 1.33.
Complex power
29. In terms of real instantaneous scalar port variables, the instantaneous
power entering a port is vi. This expression has, however, no physical meaning
if v and i are considered as complex amplitudes. We will show that the
expression
½Re vi*= ¼(vi* + v*i) (21)
can be interpreted as the average power entering the port for a harmonic state.
For such a state, the real instantaneous voltage is
Re veiwt = ½(veiwt + v*e-iwt)
and a similar expression holds for the current. The instantaneous power is the
product of these expressions; thus
w = ¼(veiwt + v*e-iwt)(ieiwt + i*e-iwt)
= ¼(vie2iwt + v*i*e- 2iwt + vi* + v*i)
The average power over a period is
w frr/w
- wdt
21T -1r/w
The terms in e±2iwt do not contribute to the integral, and the result is (21).
30. The expression vi* /2 is called the complex power. For a harmonic state, its
real part (21) is the average dissipated power (or active power) ; the physical
meaning of its imaginary part will be discussed below. For a more general
exponential state, withp = oc +jw complex, the physical interpretation of the
complex power results from the following theorem 3 : the state at p = oc +jw of a
Kirchho.ff network is identical to the steady state at jw of a new Kirchhoff network
deduced from the first by adding a resistance ocL in series with every inductance L and a
conductance ocC in parallel with every capacitance C. The theorem is an immediate
+
consequence of the relation v = ocLi jwLi which can be considered as
defining either an inductance L at frequency oc +jw or a resistance ocL in
series with an inductance Lat frequency jw. It is also a consequence of the
similar relation for a capacitance, and of the fact that the resistance and
transformer equations are frequency insensitive. In traditional alternating-
circuit theory, the electrical variables i, v in harmonic states are replaced by
their r.m.s. values i/j2, vJJ2. With that notation, the factor 1/2 disappears
in the definition of the complex power which becomes
W= vi* (22)
It is convenient to use (22), even for complex frequencies, and this will be
adopted in the following.
Complex power 49
31. The total complex power entering an n-port through all ports is
(23)
(there will be no confusion with the notation w previously aodpted for the
instantaneous power, for the latter will no longer be used). An ideal trans-
former n-port conserves complex power. This is proved as for instantaneous power
in 1.34: one immediately deduces w = 0 from (1.27) and (1.30), since N is
real. The total complex power delivered by the generators to a Kirchhoff
network is, therefore, the sum of the complex powers entering the elements.
32. Just as an instantaneous value vi was replaced by the average value (22)
when dealing with complex amplitudes, so instantaneous values such as i 2
or v2 have to be replaced by average values ii* or vv*. This shows that the
average magnetic energy is Tm= Lii* /2 for an inductance of current i, and the
the average electric energy is Te = Cvv* /2 for a capacitance of voltage v. Since
one has v = p Li for an inductance in exponential state, the complex power
entering the inductance is vi*= p Lii* = 2pTm. Similarly, for a capacitance,
i = p Cv and vi* = p*Cvv* = 2p* Te. For a resistance, the complex power is
vi*= Rii* = Wd, where Wd is the average dissipated power.
33. If one denotes by wd( Tm, Te) the sum of the average dissipated power,
(magnetic, electric energy) for all the network elements, the total complex
power delivered by the generators for a exponential state p =ct+ jw is
Wg = Wd + 2P Tm + 2p* Te
Hence
(24)
In a harmonic state (ct= 0), one obtains the dissipated (active) power as
Wd =Rew, as expected. The imaginary part Wr = 2w( Tm - Te) is called
the reactive power, and this definition establishes its physical interpretation. The
+
apparent power is Wg = (w~ w;) 112 • For an exponential state with ct -=I- 0, we
still designate Re Wg = wd + 2ct( Tm + Te) as the active power, but wd alone
is the dissipated power.
34. Since the constraints conserve complex power for all exponential states
(even for p = ct +jw complex), the active and reactive powers supplied by the gener-
ators to a Kirchhoff network are, respectively, equal to the total active and reactive powers
absorbed by the elements. Since wd and Tm+ Te are nonnegative, the real part
of (24) is nonnegative with ct, and the active power supplied by the generators to a
Kirchhoff network is nonnegative for all exponential states with Rep> 0. Note that,
for free states, the electromagnetic energy initially stored in the network
SO 2. Network analysis
elements is supplied back to the generators so that, for Rep < 0, the forced
power imposed by the generators, which is decreasing with time, may
ultimately become smaller than the backward transient power flow, which
may be steady, or decreasing more slowly. This explains the restriction to
Rep > 0 in the theorem.
35. An n-port (abstract or concrete) is called abstractly passive if the total

w
complex power w = absorbed at its ports satisfies Re w > 0 for all states in
Rep > 0 which are exponential at the ports. Since, owing to 25, all such states
are also internally exponential for a Kirchhoff n-port, theorem 34 states that
a Kirchhoff n-port is abstractly passive. In particular, the conventional elements
are themselves abstractly passive. A concrete network (n-port) composed of
abstractly passive elements is called concretely passive, and the distinction
between concrete and abstract passivity disappears for the elements (compare
with 1.8). Kirchhoff networks and n-ports are thus also concretely passive.
The distinction between concrete and abstract passivity is necessary, how-
ever, since an n-port containing, for instance, negative resistances may be
abstractly passive but is not concretely passive.
36. For a lossless Kirchhoff network, one has W,x = 0 in (24), so Re Wg =

2a( Tm + Te) has the sign of a and vanishes for a = 0. Owing to 26, the same
property holds for a lossless Kirchhoff n-port, for all exponential states at the
ports. Note that for a network containing negative reactances, one also has
Re Wg = 0 for a = 0, but the sign of Re Wg is no longer under control for
a -=/c 0. This difficulty is avoided if one considers only passive lossless n-ports,
and we therefore introduce the following definition: an (abstract) or con-
crete) n-port is called abstractly lossless ifit is abstractly passive and satisfies, in
addition, Re w = 0 for all states in Rep = 0, which are exponential at the
ports. The previous theorem, then, expresses that a lossless Kirchhoff n-port is
abstractly lossless. As in 35, a concrete network (n-port) composed of abstractly
lossless elements is called concretely lossless. Note that an n-port containing
resistances (and thus not concretely lossless) may be abstractly lossless: this
occurs, for instance, if the resistances appear on opposite diagonals ofbalanced
bridges, with respect to the ports, so that they do not dissipate in steady state.
Bilinear forms
37. Consider two states a and fJ, at complex frequencies p,x and pp (which may
be equal or not), respectively, of a transformer k-port. We will prove that
one has
(25)
Bilinear forms 51
Separating the variables of subscripts a and b in ( 1.27) and ( 1.30), one has,
successively,
= -V~a Ni,b + v;a Ni,b = 0

Adding or subtracting an expression similar to (25), but with ,x and f3 inter-
changed, one also has
(26)
38. Expression (26) taken with the negative sign also vanishes for an R, L, or
C element, provided the states ,x and f3 are taken at the same frequency p for
L and C elements. For instance, for an inductance, one has V,x = Lp ia,
VfJ = Lp i/J; thus (omitting transposition for scalars) V,x ip = vp i,x = Lp i,x ip. An
n-port (abstract or concrete) is called abstractly reciprocal, when the alternating
bilinear form
v~ i, - v~ ill= Ik
(v/l,k i,,k - v,,k ill,k) (27)
vanishes for all pairs of states ,x, f3 which are exponential at the ports and
have the same frequency p. Since they involve no internal variables, the con-
ventional elements are abstractly reciprocal. A network (n-port) composed of
abstractly reciprocal elements is called concretely reciprocal, and a Kirchhoff
network (n-port) is concretely reciprocal. In a Kirchhoff network in standard
form, the sum (27) extended over all ports under the board vanishes; since, in
addition, it vanishes separately at every port closed on a R, L, or C element,
the sum limited to the generator ports also vanishes. This expresses the reci-
procity theorem: the sum (27) extended to all generators of a Kirchhoff network vanishes for
all pairs of exponential states of identical frequency. Note that the theorem is only
proved for purely exponential states of all variables, and, therefore, cannot be
extended to Kirchhoff n-ports, since it may not hold for internally secular
states. Such states only occur at a finite number of discrete values of p (when
p coincides with some characteristic roots), so the theorem can still be stated
in the following weaker form: a Kirchhoff n-port is abstractly reciprocal for almost
all p.
39. Expression (26), taken with the positive sign, vanishes for Lor C elements
if pP = -p,x: from v,x = Lp,x i,x, vp = -Lp,x ip one immediately deduces
Va ip + v13 i,x = 0. In a lossless Kirchhoff network, the sum v~ i, + v~ ill taken
over all the generator ports is the negative sum of the similar expressions at
every element, and therefore vanishes. For a lossless Kirchhoff network, one
thus has
(28)
for all pairs of states such that Pa +P/J = 0, the sum being taken over all generators.
40. For constraints, reciprocity is distinct from power conservation. The
2-port abstractly defined by the equations
(29)
conserves instantaneous power, since one has w = v1i1 + v2 i 2 = 0 for all states,
but is not reciprocal, since (27) is
V131ia1 + Vt32 ia2 - Val i131 - Va2 i132 = 2R(i132 ial - i131ia2)
and does not vanish identically. The behavior defined by (29) can be
approximated by certain electromechanical or microwave devices. The true
2-port defined by (29) is called 4 the ideal gyrator ef ratio R and is represented
by the symbol of Fig. 2 where the arrow is necessary only to distinguish the
10----..... ...----02
•
....
R
1'o-----' ----u2'
Fm. 2.2
direction in which the parameter is R (rather than -R), when the ports are
not numbered. The equations (29) of a gyrator can be written
rv1l r-R Rl riil

V2
O
O i2
(30)
and they define a skew resistance matrix. The transpose matrix defines the
gyrator ofratio -R, which differs from the original gyrator by the reversal of
polarity at one port.
41. The complex power absorbed by a gyrator is

iv= iiv 1 + ii v 2 = R(iii2 - ii i1) (31)
Since this expression is purely imaginary, the gyrator absorbs no active power
and is abstractly lossless. Theorem 39 is extended to lossless networks containing
gyrators by proving that (28) holds for a gyrator: one writes the instantaneous
power conservation v'i = 0 for two states Cl and {3, and then for their sum
(which is also a state by superposition), and one simplifies
(vex+ v13) 1 (ia + i13) = 0
into (28).
Duality 53
Since (31) does not vanish identically, the gyrator does not conserve reactive
power. This is related to the fact that a gyrator can transform electric into
magnetic energy, or conversely. A gyrator terminated on an inductance is equivalent
to a capacitance: from (29) and v2 = -L di2/dt, one deduces successively
dv1/dt = R di2/dt = -Rv2/L = R 2i1/L

thus i1 = Cdv1/dt with C = L/R 2. A cascade connection of two gyrators is equivalent
to an ideal traniformer. With the notations of Fig. 3, the equations of the
I
-E-
1 o---- .-----□ 2
• •
.... ....
tv )(
Ra Rb
1'0----- -----u= 2'
Fm. 2.3
gyrators are
(note the change of sign of i in the last equation, since the input current into
the second gyrator is -i). By elimination one has, successively,
V1=Rav2(Rb; i2= -Rai1(Rb

and these equations define an ideal transformer of ratio Ra/Rb. One also
easily checks that a gyrator closed on a current generator is equivalent to a voltage
generator, and conversely. The discussion of networks containing gyrators is
continued in 55.
Duality
42. In the definitions (I.I) of the RLC elements, an interchange of v and i
transforms an inductance into a capacitance, and conversely, whereas a
resistance is changed into a conductance. For constraints, an interchange of
the vectors v and i in the equations ( 1.27) and ( 1.30) leads to similar equa-
tions with N replaced by -N'. Since v and i have not the same physical
dimensions (volts and amperes, respectively), a simple interchange has no
physical meaning unless a suitable scaling factor, having the dimension of a
resistance, is introduced. The simplest way of doing this is to note that the
variables v/JRo and iJRo, where Ro is an arbitrary reference resistance, have
the same dimension (watt 112 ); the new variables thus defined are called
normalized voltage and normalized current, respectively, and may be freely
interchanged. Consider an n-port element A, and interchange the normalized
variables appearing in its equations; the resulting equations define a new
n-port called the dual of A with respect to the reference Ro. The dual of B with
respect to the same reference is A.
43. The equation of a resistance R, in terms of normalized variables, is
and involves the normalized resistance R/R0 • By duality, this is changed into
its inverse, so the dual of a resistance R is the resistance R~/R. Similarly, the
normalized inductance L/Ro is changed into a normalized capacitance CR0 , so the
dual of an inductance L is a capacitance C such that
(L/C) 1 / 2 = Ro
and conversery. For ideal transformers, the voltage and current equations are
separated and no reference resistance is needed: the dual of an ideal transformer
n-port of matrix N is the n-port of matrix -N'. In particular, the 2-ports of
Figs. 1.16 and 1.1 7 are duals of each other. The dual of a gyrator of ratio R is
the gyrator of ratio -R~/R. The dual of a voltage generator e is the current generator
i = e/Ro, and conversery.
44. If all elements, generators, and constraints of a concrete network are

replaced by their duals with respect to the same reference Ro, the result is, by
definition, the dual concrete network. The extension of the duality concept to
concrete n-ports is obvious: the n-port is completed by generators to form a
network, its dual is taken and the dual generators are disconnected. The
equations (states) of the dual network (n-port) result from the equations
(states) of the original network (n-port) by interchanging normalized voltages
and currents. The dual of a passive (nondissipative, reciprocal) n-port is
passive (nondissipa tive, reciprocal).
45. The dual of a topological constraint matrix is not necessarily topological.

This was illustrated by a counterexample in 1.56 where it was, in fact, shown
that the graph of Fig. 1.15 had no dual graph; in other words, the dual of
the network of Fig. 1.15 necessarily contains a least one ideal transformer. In
~,,,
Duality 55
the following paragraph, we will show that a graph has a dual ijf it is planar and
we will describe a procedure for obtaining the (planar) dual of a planar
graph.
46. Consider a connected planar graph A (for instance the graph in solid
lines of Fig. 4). According to 1.54, it separates the plane of the figure into
Fm. 2.4
qA internal regions, where qA is the nullity of the graph, and one external
region (the sea); moreover, the boundaries of the internal regions form a
complete system of independent loops. The dual B of A is constructed by the
following procedure (yielding the graph in dotted lines of Fig. 4): place a
node of Bin each region of A (including the sea); whenever a branch of A is
the common boundary of two regions of A, a dual branch is created in B in
order to connect the nodes of B corresponding to the two regions of A. By this
procedure the number of nodes ss of Bis equal to qA + 1 (the supplementary
node corresponding to the sea of A), so the rank rs= ss - 1 of Bis equal to
the nullity qA of A. Since the branches are in one-to-one correspondence, their
number is identical in A and B, and also, r A= qs. Moreover, by the con-
struction itself, the incidence relations between loops and branches in A are
identical to the incidence relations between nodes and branches in B, so that
the voltage equations for the loops of A can, in principle, be made identical to
the current equations at the nodes of B, provided the relative orientations are
defined coherently. In other words, the above procedure which defines the
dual of a nonoriented graph must be completed in order to define an
oriented dual.
Assume, for instance, that all branches of a node a of graph A are posi-
tively oriented towards the node (Fig. 5) and that the dual of a in the graph
Fm. 2.5
B is a loop f). It is then clear that the current equation at node or; is only
correctly changed into the voltage equation of loop f3 if all branches of fJ are
also positively oriented in the same direction. For more general branch
orientations at node a, the correct orientations of the dual branches in loop fJ
are easily deduced by changing positive directions, simultaneously in graphs
A and B, when necessary. As a consequence, the positive directions of the
branches of B are deduced from the positive directions of the branches of A
by the following rule: defi,ne some arbitrary positive direction ef rotation in the plane
ef the graph (for instance, clockwise); rotate a branch ef B in that direction until it
first coincides with its dual branch in A; the positive direction in both dual branches
must then coincide. This rule obviously holds true for the first case discussed
above (Fig. 5) and is not violated by simultaneous changes of direction in two
dual branches. Although the discussion was limited to connected graphs it
may be immediately extended to planar graphs containing several separate
parts, by treating each part separately.
47. As a particular case of the construction of Fig. 4, the dual ofa number of
branches connected in series, ( thus forming a single closed loop) is the same
number of branches connected in parallel. This is illustrated in Fig. 4 by the
parallel branches 1, 2 on one hand, and 4, 5, 6 on the other. Since the inter-
change of two 2-terminal subgraphs connected in series (for instance, the
subgraphs of the previous example) has no electrical importance but may
change the graph into a topologically distinct graph (if the subgraph 1 2
between a b and the subgraph 4 5 6 between c dare interchanged, there will
be 5 branches instead of 4 incident at node a, and 5 branches instead of 6 at
node d), a system of electrical equations (or, equivalently, a path-set matrix
Imaginary resistances 57
N) does not always define a unique graph. Since a similar freedom exists in
the dual, the dual of a graph is not necessarily unique in the topological
sense. 5
48. It will now be explained why the above procedure for constructing a dual
graph is limited to planar configurations. In a connected graph B with SB
nodes, every branch is incident to exactly two nodes. In the dual A of B, every
branch must be incident to exactly two loops. To the rB = SB - l independent
nodes of B must correspond qA = rB independent loops of A, and to the
supplementary (dependent) node of B must correspond a dependent loop in
A; this requires in A the existence of qA + l loops, qA of which are inde-
pendent, such that every branch of A belongs to exactly two loops. Let the
graph A be constructed as a polyhedron (nonconvex if the graph is not
planar) in ordinary 3-dimensional space. Each loop can be considered as the
boundary of a 2-dimensional surface (a face of the polyhedron) as formed, for
instance, by depositing a soap bubble on the loop (the faces may intersect if
the polyhedron is not convex). Since one branch belongs to exactly two faces,
the faces form some connected surface which does not cut itself on the
branches (the surface is not topologically equivalent to a sphere, if the
polyhedron is not convex, and may intersect itself elsewhere, and have
holes). The number of faces must be JA = qA + l. But qA is the nullity
k - SA+ I (where k is the number of branches), so that one must have
+
f A = k - sA 2. This is Euler's relation for convex polyhedra, and it holds only if
the surface formed by the faces (on which the graph is mapped) is topolo-
gically equivalent to a sphere, hence if the graph is planar.
Imaginary resistances
49. In a harmonic state, a current I cos (wt + <p) is represented as the real
part of ieJwt where i = lei</> is the complex amplitude. If the same representa-
tion is adopted for states where I or <pare (slowly) varying functions of time
(this is of practical interest in the case of amplitude or phase modulation), the
complex amplitude i becomes a function of t. Since the equations of resis-
tances, gyrators, and ideal transformers are linear and do not involve the
operator d/dt, they remain valid for such varying complex amplitudes i and
v. On the other hand, the equation of an inductance becomes
veiwt = L -d (ieJwt) = ( L-
di +jwLi) eiwt
dt dt
Thus, dropping the common exponential factor, and writing X = Lw,
di
V =}Xi +L- (32)
dt
Equation (32) can be interpreted as the equation of the inductance L in

series with an imaginary constant resistance jX, a new element defined by the
instantaneous relation v( t) = jXi( t). Similarly, the equation of a capacitance
C brings a constant conductance jCw in parallel with C. The only new
elements generated by this approach are thus imaginary resistances. To
conclude: the states of the form x(t)eiwt of a Kirchhoff network are identical to the
states x(t) of the complex network deduced from the first by adding an imaginary
resistance jLw in series with every inductance and an imaginary conductance jCw zn
parallel with every capacitance.
50. When imaginary resistances are accepted as elements in a network, 6 its

differential equations have complex coefficients, and the entries of the
matrix F(p) in (9) are polynomials in p with complex coefficients. One may,
of course, study such complex networks as free mathematical creations, and
this will often be done in the following discussions, because the particular
properties of real networks are clarified by contrast and often established
more easily by temporarily allowing complex elements. On the other hand,
the theory of complex networks is of practical interest in modulation prob-
lems, as mentioned in 49, and this is a second motivation for their study. In
these applications, however, a complex variable x is always interpreted as
modulating a carrier eiwt, and the real physical variable is Re xeiwt. The
variable x itself is, therefore, the complex envelope of the modulated signal, its
modulus giving the real envelope and its phase producing the phase modula-
+ +
tion of the carrier. With x = Xr jxi, and xeiwt = ar jai, one has
-sin wtl Xrlr (33)

coswt Lxi
Although only the real part ar is of physical interest, the imaginary part
ai must be simultaneously considered, as will be evident from the following
discussion.
51. Let ( 1) be written

+ +
Yr jyi = (Fr jFi) (xr jxi) + (34)
for a complex network and an exponential state of the complex envelopes.
The separation of real and imaginary parts gives
IYrl =
LYi
fFr
LFi Fr
rLx,
-Frl x~1 (35)
and this can be abbreviated into T/ = f Similarly (33) will be written
+
oc = Qg and the matrix Q of (33) is orthogonal. Let b = hr jbi = yeiwt. By
analogy with (33), one will obtain a relation f3 = Ori. Combining all relations,
one obtains
f3 = QQ' 0( (36)
Imaginary resistances 59
and this shows that the subvector hr of fl, alone of physical interest, depends
on both entries ar and ai of cc. As a consequence, both subvectors must be
simultaneously treated in modulation problems. Similarly, ( 35) shows that the
real and imaginary parts of the complex envelopes interact. In modulation
theory the real part Xr of a complex envelope is called the inphase component,
and the imaginary part Xi is the quadrature component7 ; this is because in the
expression xeiwt, the phase of the carrier eiwt is not altered if Xi = 0, whereas
this phase is changed by 7T/2 if Xr = 0.
52. Consider a modulated voltage v(t)eiwt and a modulated current i(t)eiwt,

with v and i complex. As in 29-30, the instantaneous power is the product
Re[v(t)eiwtJ Re[i(t)eiwtJ of the real signals; when averaged over a period of
the carrier, it gives Re v(t)i*(t); this expression is slowly varying and repre-
sents the real instantaneous envelope power. This shows that in networks with
complex elements, where all instantaneous variables are complex, the
instantaneous power is not v(t)i(t) but Re v(t)i*(t). At least, such a definition
arises naturally from modulation theory and will be adopted, for coherence, in
the general theory of complex networks. Note that both definitions coincide
for real networks, and that one is mathematically free to adopt an arbitrary
definition whenever a theory is extended outside its original domain, provided
it reduces to the accepted definition in the original domain. 8 Moreover, it
will be convenient to call v(t)i*(t) the complex instantaneous power; the true
instantaneous power is the real part of this expression and the imaginary part
will be interpreted in 53-54.
53. Consider a real Kirchhoff network in a modulated state. The complex

instantaneous power vi* in a resistance is Rii*, hence real and positive, and is
the dissipated power averaged over a carrier period, hence the envelope dissi-
pated power. For an inductance, the relation between v and i is (32), and the
complex instantaneous power is
v(t)i* (t) = jXii* + i* L di/dt (37)
The term Xii* is the reactive power in the inductance, averaged over a
carrier period, hence the envelope reactive power (it exists even in the absence of
modulation, i.e., for constant i). Since i*L di/dt = (d/dt)(Lii*/2), and since
Lii* /2 represents the magnetic energy averaged over a carrier period, that
is, the slowly varying envelope magnetic energy, the second term of (37) is the
rate of change of envelope magnetic energy. A similar decomposition holds
for the instantaneous power in a capacitance. Finally, the complex in-
stantaneous power is conserved in ideal transformers, as in 31. Consequently,
the total complex instantaneous power Wg delivered by the generators is
Wg = wa +jwr + dT/dt (38)
where wa is the total envelope dissipated power, Wr the total envelope reactive
power, and T the total envelope electromagnetic energy. Separating real and
imaginary parts, one has
Wgr = wa + dT/dt (39)
Wgi = Wr (40)
and the conservation of the true instantaneous power given by (39) is identical to
(12) for real networks. On the other hand, (40) interprets the imaginary part
of the complex instantaneous power as the total envelope reactive power.
54. In a network containing imaginary resistances in addition to conven-

tional elements, the complex instantaneous power absorbed by an imaginary
resistancejX isjXii*, hence purely imaginary, so that the imaginary resistance
absorbs no real instantaneous power and is abstractly lossless. On the other
hand, the usual expression of the complex power in an inductance gives only
the second term of (37), the first term being produced by the elementjX in
series. Consequently, when, in theorem 49, the state x(t)efwt of a Kirchhoff
network is replaced by the state x(t) of a complex network, nothing is
changed in the power equations (39-40): in the complex network, the total
reactive power Wr is simply delivered to the imaginary resistances instead of
being indirectly absorbed in the inductances and capacitances.
Generalized networks
55. In addition to the conventional elements, we have introduced the
gyrator in 40 and the imaginary resistance in 49, and both elements have been
proved abstractly lossless, in 41 and 54, respectively. Once new elements are
introduced, some conventional elements become redundant: in particular, as
a result of 41, inductances and transformers can be suppressed in the catalogue
of elements if gyrators are included. Also, the concept of standard form, in-
troduced for Kirchhoff networks in 1.66, is less useful for generalized networks
since the separation between elements and constraints is less obvious (com-
binations of gyrators may produce transformers) and, consequently, it is more
difficult to characterize well-defined networks. The concept of a well-defined
network remains, however, quite clear. Moreover, some of the basic theorems
of this chapter remain true for generalized networks, and these will now be
discussed.
56. In 16, it was emphasized that the stability of a Kirchhoff network was
essentially due to the positive character of the RLC elements. Provided this
restriction is kept, the stability theorems of 16, 17, and 25 also hold for
Generalized networks 61
generalized networks, for these theorems were all derived from (12) and (16).
Both relations hold true if gyrators are accepted. On the other hand, (12) is
changed into the identical relation (39) if imaginary resistances are accepted,
whereas x' x is replaced by xx in ( 16) in the case of complex variables; but this
does not alter the conclusion. Moreover, since gyrators and imaginary
resistances are lossless, theorems 20 and 26 remain valid also.
57. Since gyrators and imaginary resistances are abstractly lossless, they are
also abstractly passive; therefore, an n-port (network) composed of these
elements in addition to conventional elements is concretely passive. We now
prove that a concretely passive n-port is also abstractly passive: since the com-
plex power absorbed by gyrators and imaginary resistances is purely
imaginary, the real part of (24) is not altered, and the conclusions of 34-35
remain valid. An n-port (network) composed of the mentioned elements
with the exclusion of real resistances is concretely lossless. By a similar
extension of 36, a concretely lossless n-port is abstractly lossless.
58. Any one-port is abstractly reciprocal, since it is defined by a scalar

relation, and this holds for imaginary resistances. An n-port (network)
composed of RLC elements, imaginary resistances, and ideal transformers
is thus concretely reciprocal, and this holds even if the RLC elements are
allowed to be negative. The proof of 38 applies to such an n-port and a con-
cretely reciprocal n-port is abstractly reciprocal for almost all p. The theorem is
generally not true for networks containing gyrators, but can be generalized
into an interreciprocity theorem 9 between two networks.
59. Let electrical variables of subscript IX designate some state of the gyrator
(30) and let variables of subscript fJ designate some state of the transpose
gyrator. From the gyrators equations one immediately deduces
V1a i113 + V2a i213 = V113 i1a + V213 i2a

thus, in vector notation
(41)
If one defines, more generally, as the transpose ef a concrete network (n-port), the
network (n-port) resulting from it, by changing all gyrator polarities while
keeping invariant all reciprocal elements and connections, the identity (41) holds
true for any exponential state IX ef one network combined with any exponential state
fJ at the same frequency of the transpose network, the summation implicit in (41) being
limited to generator ports. The proof consists in adding to the identities (41)
written for all gyrators, the similar identity (which is simply the reciprocity
theorem) for the reciprocal part of the network. One can also define the
transpose f3 ef an abstract n-port a by requiring the states of f3 to be deducible

from the states of a by (41),for almost all p. The last restriction is necessary
because, for some discrete values of p, exponential states at the ports may
produce internally secular states, and (41) does not hold for such states.
60. All elements except the imaginary resistance are real elements, and a net-
work (n-port) composed of real elements is a concrete real network (concrete real
n-port). The differential equations ofreal networks have real coefficients, and
the resulting polynomial matrices are real. The term Kirchhoff network
(n-port) now appears as an abbreviation for concrete real passive reciprocal
network (n-port).
i'
I
chapter 3
Analysis of n-ports
The elimination problem

I. We now consider generalized concrete n-ports formed by a finite number of
any of the elements mentioned in 2.55, generators being excluded, as stated
in 1.68. By adding n generators, one forms a generalized network which can
be assumed to be in standard form: it consists of a transformer k-port under
the board and of elements (conventional and generalized) and generators
above the board. As in 2.1, the network is described by 2k equations in 2k
variables. The n-port in standard form is deduced from the network when
the n generators are replaced by ports, and this suppresses the n generator
equations. It remains 2k - n homogeneous equations in 2k variables, 2n
of which are the port variables, the remaining 2(k - n) being internal
variables. By eliminating the 2(k - n) internal variables from the 2k - n
relations, one generally obtains 2k - n - 2(k - n) = n homogeneous equations
relating the 2n port variables. These are the equations ef the n-port.
2. The external behavior of a concrete n-port is thus generally characterized

by n equations; this was the case for the conventional elements, as mentioned
in 1.71, and for all generalized elements introduced later. For general
concrete n-ports however, this number was justified only by a simple count
of the equations which remained after elimination. It may occur, at least
in principle, that the resulting n equations will not be linearly independent,
so that the number of independent equations will become smaller than n.
It may also happen that the elimination of the 2(k - n) internal variables
will consume less than the same number equations, because some variables
63
64 3. Analysis of n-ports
spontaneously appear with zero coefficients and are already eliminated;

the result is that the number of n-port equations is then larger than n. In
principle, the number of independent relations connecting the 2n variables
of an n-port can thus be any number r between O and 2n. This number is
called the dimensionality of the n-port.
3. We now discuss in more detail the elimination of the internal variables

leading to the n-port equations. Algebraic elimination is a process whereby
a system of relations is transformed into an equivalent system (satisfied by
the same sets of values for the variables) where certain variables have
disappeared in some equations. The 2k - n equations before elimination are
differential, although they become algebraic when d/dt is replaced by p.
In accordance with 2.8, they can be transformed into an equivalent system
only by means of a premultiplication by a unimodular matrix, and the
elimination process must, therefore, be performed in that way if the final
n-port equations are required to be reinterpretable as differential equations.
A unimodular elimination can be achieved in the following way. 1 We start
from the full 2k - n relations in 2k variables, which we write Fx = 0, where
Fis now a rectangular matrix. Assume that the 2k electrical variables have
been initially ordered in such a way that the first 2(k - n) entries of x are
the internal variables Xrx. to be eliminated, whereas the last 2n variables are
the port variables XiJ. Transform Finto a row-echelon form, in accordance
with A.74. The resulting equations are Hx = 0 and have a number of zero
entries in the lower left-hand corner. Designate by p the largest number of rows
which appear with all identically zero entries in the first 2(k - n) columns
of H. The partitioning of the variables (columns) into 2(k - n) inter-
nal variables and 2n external variables, on one hand, and the partitioning
of the 2k - n rows into p lower rows with zeros in the first 2(k - n)
columns and the 2k - n - p remaining rows, on the other, defines the
partition of H into four submatrices
2k -n -p (1)
p
and the corresponding equations are of the form
(2)
The last p equations HiJiJXiJ = 0 in (2) involve only the port variable.s XiJ,
whereas the first 2k - n - p equations of (2) are simply disregarded. Finally,
the last p equations may be linearly dependent (if the normal rank r of
H/J/J is smaller than p) so that some p - r equations can be dropped. Writing
L
The elimination problem 65
u for the vector xp of the port variables, one obtains these final n-port
equations as
Gu=O (3)
where G is a submatrix of normal rank r of Hpp. In conclusion, the equations
of an n-port are ef the form (3), where G is a polynomial matrix of some normal rank
r, the dimensionality of the n-port, and the entries of G are polynomial in p of finite
degree.
4. In 1.7 we have introduced the concept of an abstract n-port defined by

the equations relating its port variables. In order to be realistic and discuss
only such abstract n-ports which can hopefully be realized with the help
of a finite number of generalized elements, we must impose on the defining
equations the form of (3) with the restrictions stated in the last theorem. In
particular, we only consider linear time-invariant n-ports. Moreover, the
restriction of the entries of G to polynomials of finite degree excludes dis-
tributed structures, leading to irrational or transcendental functions of p
represented by their series expansions which are polynomials of infinite
degree. At present, however, we do not impose any particular value on
the normal rank r of G. Moreover, at some p, the local rank roof G may fall
below r, and is naturally called the local abstract dimensionality of the n-port.
5. Let us return to the concrete n-port whose complete matrix H in row-

echelon form, before the elimination of the internal variables, is ( 1). In that
form, p was the largest number of rows containing identically zero entries
in the first 2(k - n) columns corresponding to the internal variables. At a
particular value Po of p, additional entries of H may vanish, so the number
po, playing locally the role of p, may be larger. If the partition similar to
( 1) had to be done locally, one would then attribute the larger row dimension
Po to the submatrix playing the role of Hpp; the local rank rb of this (larger)
submatrix bears no direct relation either to the normal rank r, or to the
local rank r 0 , of the sub matrix H /3/3 deduced from the partition ( 1) for
general values of p. In view of its origin, rb is naturally called the local con-
crete dimensionality of then-port. Note that one has ro::;:; r6 and r0 ::;:; r (normal
dimensionality), but rb and rare not related.
6. For an abstract n-port, the local concrete dimensionality is not defined,

since the complete matrix His known only for concrete n-ports, or for a given
concrete realization of an abstract n-port. On the other hand, a concrete n-port
has both a local concrete dimensionality rb (as defined in 5) and a local abstract
dimensionality ro, defined as follows: once the equations (3) of a concrete
n-port are established, one may consider them as defining an abstract n-port
and compute the local rank ro of G.
7. Let us start from a concrete n-port and freeze it at Po. This means that
every frequency-dependent component is replaced by a resistance having the
same equation at Po; thus every inductance L (capacitance C) of the original
n-port becomes a resistance R = Lpo (a conductance G = Cpo) in the frozen
n-port, whereas the other components remain unaltered. The frozen n-port is
independent of frequency and has a constant dimensionality. From 5 it is
obvious that the local concrete dimensionality cif the original n-port at Po is the dimen-
sionality cif the frozen n-port.
8. Let us finally remark that the polynomial matrix G of (3) is not unique,
since an equivalent system of differential equations is obtained after pre-
multiplication by an arbitrary unimodular matrix. For a real concrete
n-port, as defined in 2.60, the matrices F, H, and G of 3 are real polynomial
matrices. As a consequence, if u is a state at frequency p of a real n-port, u*
is a state at frequency p*. It is, therefore, natural to introduce a similar defi-
nition for abstract n-ports: an n-port is real if there exists some form of its
defining equation (3) where G is a real polynomial matrix.
Well-defined n-ports
9. By terminating an (abstract or concrete) n-port on n (voltage or current)
generators, one forms a network, and it is natural to call an n-port well
defined when it is possible to choose, at least in one way, n independent
generators in order to make the terminated network well-defined. One can-
not, however, specify the particular nature (voltage or current) of the gen-
erators at each port; otherwise, even the ideal transformer 2-port would be
ill-defined (it cannot be terminated on two independent voltage generators).
Another difficulty appears in the case of an abstract n-port: when such an
n-port is terminated, only the values of the port variables occur in the equa-
tions, so that one can judge whether these equations are indeterminate or
incompatible only with respect to the port variables and one has no control
on the internal variables appearing in any concrete realization of the
abstract n-port. The above remarks justify the following, rather weak, defi-
nition 2 : an n-port is well-defined ijf, by terminating some s cif its ports on voltage
generators and the complementary n - s ports on current generators, it is possible to
form a network whose port variables are uniquely determined, for independent values cif
all generators.
10. A well-defined n-port has dimensionality n. For r =I= n, one obtains, for the
+
terminated network, a total of r n =f. 2n equations in the 2n port variables,
so that the equations are either indeterminate (for r < n) or incompatible
(for r > n, except possibly for special values of the generators). On the other
Well-defined n-ports 67
hand, not every abstract n-port of dimensionality n is well-defined, as shown

by the following counterexample. The 2-port defined by the equations
v1 = i1 = 0, which do not involve i2 and v2, has dimensionality 2 since these
two equations are linearly independent. The connection of a nonzero voltage
or current generator at port 1 is, however, incompatible with the equations,
whereas the situation at port 2 is indeterminate for all terminations. The
definition of a well-defined n-port thus requires a stronger condition than the
mere specification of dimensionality n. This condition will be established
in 14.
11. We now discuss the behavior of well-defined n-ports for exponential

states, as characterized by Eq. (3) where G is of dimension (n · 2n) and has
normal rank n. Partition the 2n-vector u of the port variables into two
n-vectors v and i, and assume that the columns of Gare numbered in accord-
ance; this defines a partition of G = [A, ~ B] into two square matrices, a
negative sign having been arbitrarily introduced in the second submatrix.
Equation (3) then becomes
Av=Bi (4)
In the case of a one-port, A and B are scalars. For A -=I- 0, one can write
(4) as
v=Zi (5)
where Z = B / A is a scalar rational function of p, the impedance of the one-port.
Similarly, for B -=I- 0, one writes (4) as
i= Yv (6)
and Y is the admittance of the one-port. In particular, the impedances of a
resistance R, of an inductance L, and of a capacitance Care R, Lp, and 1/Cp,
respectively. A short circuit has zero impedance and no admittance, for the
equation v = 0 cannot be solved for i; it is of course equivalent to say that
the admittance is infinite. An open circuit has zero admittance and no
impedance.
12. For an n-port, the transformation of (4) into (5) is only possible if <let A
does not vanish identically; Z is then the impedance matrix of the n-port, and
its entries are rational functions of p. Similarly, if <let B -=I- 0, then (6) defines
the admittance matrix Y. As an example, Eqs. (1 .4) define the impedance
matrix of an inductance n-port as Z = pL, where Lis the inductance matrix.
The physical interpretation of the entries of an impedance or admittance
matrix directly results from (5) and (6). The equation Vi= L Ziiii contained
in (5) reduces to Vi= Ziiii when all currents other than ii are zero, that is,
when all ports except j are open-circuited; this shows that ZtJ is the ratio of
the voltage appearing at port i to the current injected at portj, that is, the
transfer impedance from port j to port i. In particular, Zu is the impedance seen from
port i when all other ports are open-circuited. Similarly, YtJ is the transfer admit-
tance fromj to i, and Yu is the admittance seen from port i when all other
ports are short-circuited.
13. If both det A and det B vanish identically, the n-port has neither im-
pedance nor admittance matrices; this occurs for the ideal transformer
n-port, for Eqs. (1.27-1.30) are combined into form (4) by writing them as
0
- I n-r
] [Va]
Vb =
[Ir0 N] [ia]
0 ib
(7)
Both A and B are singular, but the rank of system (7) is n, for the minor
formed by the last n - r columns of A and the first r columns of-Bis ± 1.
14. Consider a well-defined n-port, and partition the ports into s ports of
subscript a and into the remaining n - s ports of subscript b. By definition,
there exists such a partition leading to a well-defined network where the
voltages Va and the currents ib are data imposed by the generators. As a
result, the determinant of system (4) in the unknowns Vb and ia does not
vanish identically, and the solution is of the form
(8)
to be abbreviated into3
y=Hx (9)
where His a square matrix of order n, rational in p, called a hybrid matrix.
Note that what has been established is not simply the solvability of (4) for
some n variables (which is trivial if G has normal rank n); we have shown, in
addition, that the dependent variables in (8) are the currents at some sports and
the voltages at the remaining n - sports. This is summarized by stating that an
n-port is well-defined if! it admits at least one hybrid matrix. In this formulation,
impedance and admittance matrices are considered as particular cases of
hybrid matrices (s =nor s = 0, respectively). Note finally, that the equations
(7) of an ideal transformer n-port are spontaneously m hybrid form with
(10)
By analogy with this case, it is convenient to refer to the first s ports (of
subscript a) as shunt ports and to the last n - s ports (of subscript b) as series
ports. The entries of the submatrix Hbb of (8) relating the variables at the
i,
Well-defined n-ports 69
series ports have the dimensions of an impedance; similarly, the entries of

H aa have the dimensions of an admittance; finally the entries of Hab and Hba
are dimensionless.
15. Consider two well-defined n-ports, both having the same numbers of
series ports on the one hand, and of shunt ports on the other, and designate
by HI and Hn their hybrid matrices. We prove that if the shunt ports are
paralleled (port by port) and if the series ports are connected in series, the resulting
n-port has the hybrid matrix
H=HI+Hu ( 11)
The connections are shown in Fig. I for a pair ofrepresentative ports of each
b
B
Hr
b'
A'
Hn b'
s·
FIG. 3.1
kind, thus forming ports A and B of the resulting n-port. The shunt connec-
tion of ports a imposes the same value of Va to both partial n-ports, whereas
the series condition of ports b imposes the same value of ib, so the vector x of
(9) is the same for both partial n-ports. Writing YI = HI x and yn =Hux,
+ +
one has YI yn = Hx by ( 11); but YI yu is precisely the vector y of the
resulting n-port, since the currents ia add up to total port current at the shunt
ports, whereas the voltages Vb add up to the total port voltages at the series
ports. As a corollary, impedance matrices (when they exist) add up for series con-
nections at all ports, and admittance matrices add up for parallel connections.
16. As a simple example (which will be used in one of the next paragraphs),
consider the 2-port of Fig. 2. Its equations are ii= -i2 = (v1 - v2)/Ro; its
1n-----' ------n2
1·0-----------<02'
Fm. 3.2
admittance matrix is thus
Go -Go] (12)
[
-Go Go
with Go= I /Ro. On the other hand, the admittance matrix of a gyrator of
ratio R is the inverse of its impedance matrix (2.30), that is,
[~ (13)
with G = 1/R. The parallel connection of these 2-ports at both ports (cor-
rectly described by the 2-port equations since one of the component 2-ports
is true) constitutes the 2-port of Fig. 3 whose admittance matrix is the sum of
'--+---02
•
1'0---...,_____.,___0 2·
Fm. 3.3
(12) and (13), that is,
Go -(Go +G)] (14)

[
G-Go Go
Passivity and reciprocity of well-defined n-ports 71
Passivity and reciprocity of well-defined n-ports

17. We investigate the restrictions imposed by abstract passivity, abstract
losslessness, or abstract reciprocity on well-defined n-ports in 18-22 and on
general n-ports in 23-30. Since, by 2,57-58, concrete passivity (losslessness,
reciprocity) implies the corresponding abstract properties, all results will also
hold a fortiori for concrete n-ports. For the sake of conciseness, the qualifier
abstract is omitted throughout.
18. The expression (2.23) w =iv= i*'v of the complex power is a scalar and
equal to its transpose v'i*. Its conjugate is thus w* = v'*i = iii and the active
power is Re w with
2 Re w=iv+vi (15)
In the hybrid equations (9), an entry Xk of xis either Vk or ik, and the corre-
sponding entryYk ofyis then the other variableatthesameport. Consequently,
X1cYZ is either V1c iZ or its conjugate, and the real parts of both expressions are
identical. One may thus compute as well the active power by
2 Re w=jix+xy (16)
By (9), one then has
2 Re w = x(H + H)x (17)
According to the definition of abstract passivity, one must have Rew> 0 for
all exponential states in Rep > 0, and ( I 7) shows that the hermitian matrix
H + H must then be positive definite in Rep > 0. A matrix H (p), such that
+
H H is everywhere positive definite in Re p > 0 is called a positive matrix.
We have thus proved that the hybrid matrix (and, in particular, the impedance
and admittance matrices, if they exist) of a passive n-port is a positive matrix.
Note that His the conjugate of H'(p), i.e., [H'(p)]*, which is different from
H'(p*) if the entries of Hare rational functions with complex coefficients.
For a real n-port, His a real rational matrix, which means that its entries are
rational functions with real coefficients. The hybrid matrix of a real passive
n-port is a positive real matrix. When a positive matrix reduces to a scalar, it is
called a positive function (of p). In particular, the impedance and the admittance
of a (real) passive one-port are (real) positive functions.
19. For a lossless n-port, expression ( I 7) shows that one has H + H = 0, for
allp =jw, which means H(p) +[H'(p)]* = 0, for p =jw. Since, for p =jw,
one has -p* = p, one can just as well write the last expression as
H(p) + [H'(-p*)]* = 0 (18)
Iff(p) is an analytic function of p, so is [f( -p*)]*: a term akpk in the series

expansion off(p) is replaced in [f( -p*)]* by [ak( -p*)k]* = a!( -p)k, and
this defines the series expansion in p of the second function. The entries of
the left-hand side of (18) are thus analytic functions (in fact, rational) of p
and cannot vanish at an infinite number of points (for all p = jw) without
vanishing identically. Consequently, although established initially on the
imaginary axis, (18) is true for allp.
It is convenient to introduce the lower asterisk notationf.(p) to denote
[f ( -p*)] *, for this permits one to writef* without mentioning the argument.
The function f* is often called 4 the para-conjugate ofJ. For a matrix M, the
ordinary conjugate transpose is noted M'* =Mand it is natural to introduce
the notation 1:f = M~ for the para-conjugate transpose. With this notation, (18)
is rewritten as
(19)
By analogy with the condition H +if= 0 defining a skew-hermitian matrix,

a matrix satisfying (19) is called skew para-hermitian. We have thus proved
that the hybrid matrix of a lossless n-port is positive and skew para-hermitian.
20. For a real function the definitionf.(p) = [f(-p*)]* of the para-conju-

gate reduces tof.(p) =f(-p). Similarly, for a real matrix, If(p) reduces to
H'( -p), so that (19) reduces to
ll(P) +H'(-p) =o (20)
for a real lossless n-port. By analogy with the condition H + H' = 0 defining
a skew matrix, a matrix satisfying (20) is called para-skew. To conclude: the
hybrid matrix of a real lossless n-port is positive real and para-skew.
21. If an n-port IX has a hybrid matrix Ha defined with respect to a port labeling where
the firsts ports are shunt ports and the last n - sports are series ports, the transpose
n-port f3 (as defined in 2.59) has the hybrid matrix
Hp= 0H;0 (21)
where
(22)
with the same port partition. The partition of the electrical variables for IX is in
accordance with (8). Let us impose the same partition on the variables of f3
and separate the various contributions to (2.41) which becomes
Dimensionality theorems 73
Since all terms are scalars, any of them can be replaced by its transpose.
Transposing the last two terms, and regrouping the two extreme terms and
the two central terms, one rewrites the equation as
With notation (22), this is

x~0ya - y;exa = 0 (23)
Since (9) applies to n-port oi:, Eq. (23) becomes
(x~ 0Ha - y~ 0)xa = 0 (24)
This must hold for all states; hence the coefficient matrix of Xrx in (24)
vanishes identically; since 0 is symmetric and equal to its inverse, the trans-
pose of the resulting equation is
yfl=0H~0xfl
which proves that (21) is the hybrid matrix of n-port fJ with the same port
partition. With partition (8), (21) gives explicitly
Hf!= [ H~.'/'°' -H~,ba] (24)

-Ha,ab H~,bb
Note that this proves that the transpose ef a well-defined n-port is well-defined.
22. A reciprocal n-port is its own transpose, and one must have H = H rx =Hp,
hence H = 0H'0 or
0H=H'0 (25)
From (24) one then deduces
(26)
and the conditions of reciprocity are Haa and Hbb symmetric and Hf,a = -Hab. In
particular, the impedance and admittance matrices of reciprocal n-ports (if they exist)
are symmetric.
Dimensionality theorems
23. In 24-27, we will establish a number of theorems on the dimensionality
of various classes of n-ports (abstract or concrete), without assuming a priori
that they are well-defined. In 28-30, we will show examples of ill-defined
n-ports. In 31-36, we prove that certain classes of concrete n-ports are always
well-defined.
24. The local abstract dimensionality ro of a passive n-port at any Po in Re p > 0 is

at least n. Form a network by terminating the n ports on n unit resistances.
The states of the network satisfy simultaneously (3) and v = -i, a system of
+
rank not exceeding r n in 2n variables. For r0 < n, the system has, certainly,
nontrivial exponential solutions x =I=- 0, thus v -=I- 0 and i -=I- 0, at Po. For such
states, one has w = -ii= -Ilikl 2 < 0, and this contradicts the definition
of passivity if it occurs in Rep > 0. One has thus proved r0 > n; hence, a
fortiori, r > n and the dimensionality of a passive n-port is at least n.
25. If the dimensionality of an n-port a is r, the dimensionality of the transpose n-port

f3 is at least 2n -
r. For a dimensionality r, the r equations of the n-port leave
2n - r independent port variables. Let the state of f3 be fixed and take suc-
cessively for the states of a all but one of the 2n - r independent variables
equal to zero, the remaining one being unity. The expressions (2.41) for all
combinations of state f3 with all states a yield 2n - r linear relations in the 2n
variables defining state {3. If ias( Vat) is one of the 2n - r independent variables
of a, the first (second) term of (2.41) written with a unit value for that inde-
pendent variable will contain vp 8 ( -ipt) but no other entry of vp( -ip) whose
subscript s(t) corresponds to an independent variable in ia(va)- Consequently,
the variables vp8 (ip 1) each occur only once with a coefficient ±1 in the set
of 2n - r relations thus produced, and these relations are linearly inde-
pendent. One has thus obtained 2n - r relations between the variables of an
arbitrary state of {3, and the theorem is proved.
26. The last theorem was stated in terms of the dimensionality r rather than
of the local abstract dimensionality ro, because it may not hold for the latter,
whenever (2.41) is not applicable owing to the presence of internally secular
states. However, the theorem holds locally almost everywhere. As a corollary,
if an n-port is reciprocal for almost all p, its dimensionality is at least n: the transpose
is the n-port itself, and 25 gives r > 2n - r, hence r > n.
27. Theorems 24-26 hold for the (abstract) dimensionality of both abstract
and concrete n-ports. If a concrete n-port is replaced by the corresponding
frozen n-port, as defined in 7, the same theorems are established for the local
concrete dimensionality, because a passive n-port remains passive when
frozen at a Po with Re Po> 0, and a frozen reciprocal n-port remains
reciprocal.
28. In order to show that stronger results cannot be deduced from abstract
properties, we consider in detail the various ill-defined one-ports which can be
conceived. A one-port has two port variables v and i, and its dimensionality
may be r = 0, I, or 2. For r = 1, the one-port is well-defined and has an
impedance or an admittance, as discussed in 11. In the case r = 0, there is
no relation between the two port variables v and i, so the corresponding one-
port is uniquely defined by stating that it accepts separately arbitrary values
Dimensionality theorems 75
of v and i. Such a one-port is called a norator. In order to show that it can be

realized, consider the 2-port of Fig. 3 with a reversed gyrator polarity. This
changes G into -Gin the admittance matrix (14), and the corresponding
equations are
i1 = Gov1 - (Go -G)v2 (27)
i2 = -(G + Go)v1 + Gov2 (28)
Terminating this 2-port on a resistance R ( equal to the gyrator ratio), one
iR
1
~ ~
• •
vt ~
R
R
1'
Fm. 3.4
produces the concrete one-port of Fig. 4. The terminating condition is

i2 = -Gv2 (29)
The elimination of i2 between (28) and (29) gives
(Go+ G)(v1 - v2) = 0 (30)
For Go -=fa- - G, (30) gives v1 = v2, and (27) becomes
i1 = Gv1 (31)
so the one-port is then well-defined and equivalent to a resistance R. For
Go= -G, however, (30) is an identity and one equation is missing, so v2 can
no longer be eliminated from (27) and the one-port has no equation. The
one-port of Fig. 4 with Ro= -R is thus a concrete realization of the norator.
29. The case r = 2 defines two independent homogeneous relations between

the two variables v and i, and the only solution is v = i = 0. The correspond-
ing unique one-port is called a nullator. We will now show that the one-port
of Fig. 4 with a polarity reversal in the gyrator, and with Ro= -R, is a realization
of the nullator. This is an immediate consequence of theorem 25 with n = I,
r0 = 0, since the new one-port is the concrete transpose of the norator. Its
dimensionality is thus at least 2, hence 2. In contrast with the norator, the

nullator is abstractly passive and reciprocal, for its only state v = i = 0 satisfies both
definitions. Concretely, however, the nullator is neither passive (for it contains
a negative resistance) nor reciprocal (for it contains a gyrator).
30. It is interesting to compare the norator and nullator with a short or an

open circuit; these are respectively defined by the following equations:
short circuit: v=0, i arbitrary (32)
open circuit: i = 0, v arbitrary (33)
It thus appears that the nullator corresponds to the first equations (32-33),
whereas the norator corresponds to the second equations. In a certain sense,
both the nullator and the norator thus behave simultaneously as a short and
open circuit, and this sets in evidence the pathological behavior of ill-defined
one-ports. 5 By juxtaposing a nullator at the input and a norator at the output,
one forms a 2-port of equations v1 = 0, i1 = 0 called a nullor. This shows
that this ill-defined example, already considered in 10, is realistic, for it
has a concrete realization. This example also shows that the next lemma
is not trivial.
Dimensionality of concrete n-ports

31. The lemma states that if a passive n-port satisfies r < n, it is well-defined.
Since one has r > n by theorem 24, the hypothesis of the lemma forces r = n.
It remains to establish the existence of a hybrid matrix. With the notations of (4)
and 24, the equations of then-port terminated on n unit resistances become,
eliminating v,
(A +B)i=0 (34)
As mentioned in the proof of theorem 24, (34) can only have the trivial
solution i = 0, so that det (A+ B) cannot vanish in Rep:?: 0, and thus cannot
vanish identically. By A.14, det (A +
B) is a sum of 2n determinants, each
consisting of a number of columns of A and of the complementary columns
of B. At least one of these determinants does not vanish identically, so that
the matrix G = [A, -B] contains at least one not identically singular minor
of dimension n formed by some columns of A and the complementary columns
of B. The existence of such a minor of G is equivalent to the existence of a
hybrid matrix.6
32. The example of the nullator in 29 (which is abstractly but not concretely
passive) shows that concrete passivity is stronger than abstract passivity. We
will, accordingly, prove the following theorem, that is stronger than theorem
Dimensionality of concrete n-ports 77
24: a concrete passive n-port is well-defined. To prove the theorem, we assume

that the n-port is in standard form and first destroy all connections between
the elements above the board and the transformer k-port under the board.
At this stage the theorem is true, because all elements and the transformer
k-port are well-defined. The connections are restored by inserting one by
one each two-terminal plug into its socket. Every such operation is simply
the interconnection between two ports of the n-port obtained at the previous
stage, and transforms an n-port into an (n - 2)-port, since the interconnected
ports are disregarded and the corresponding variables eliminated. The
theorem will thus be established by recurrence if one proves that if two ports
ef a concrete passive well-defined n-port are interconnected and disregarded,
the resulting
(n - 2)-port is well defined. It is, in fact, sufficient to prove that the dimen-
sionality of the resulting (n - 2)-port is at most n - 2, that is, it decreases at
least by 2, for one will then be in the conditions of lemma 31, and the well-
defined character of the (n - 2)-port follows. Let the interconnected ports be
1 and 2; the interconnection imposes the constraints
(35)
(36)
and this adds two equations to the n equations of the original n-port. The
equations of the (n - 2)-port obtained by disregarding the interconnected
ports 1 and 2 result from the elimination of the four internal variables
i1 i2 vi v2 between (35) and (36) and the n-port equations. The announced
theorem will be proved if we show that the elimination consumes at least four
equations, for general values of p. The elimination of one current and one
voltage (say ii and v1) is trivial and consumes (35) and (36). It remains to
eliminate i2 and v2 and to prove that each elimination consumes at least one
equation; this will be proved for i 2 , for the proof for v2 is analogous. If i 2
appears with a nonzero coefficient in at least one equation, that equation can
be solved for i2 and disregarded after the elimination, so one equation is
consumed. If i 2 appears in no equation, no elimination is needed, but one is
left with one equation in excess; we will prove that the remaining equations
are not independent in that case, so one equation at least can simply be
dropped. If i 2 does not appear in the equations, the original n-port accepts
states with i 2 arbitrary and i1 = -i 2 , independently of the values of the
independent variables at the other ports. By setting these other variables
equal to zero, one imposes zero power at all ports other than 1 and 2, since
either the current or the voltage at each port is an independent variable.
For the states thus defined, the total power of the n-port is v1 if v2 ii =+
( -v 1 + v2 )ii, and its real part can be made negative unless (36) holds; this
would contradict passivity of the original n-port if it occurred for all p. This
shows that (36) must be a consequence of the n-port equations, and the
elimination of v2 has thus produced a redundant equation which can be
dropped.
33. The local concrete and abstract dimensionalities of a concrete passive n-port are
n for all Po in Rep > 0. By 24, one has ro > n. By 31, one has r = n. Since
ro < r = n, one has ro = n. On the other hand, a concrete passive n-port
frozen at Po, with Re Po > 0, remains concrete passive, thus well-defined,
and one has, therefore r0= n.
34. In the following theorem, we repeat for reciprocity of concrete n-ports

what was done for passivity in 31-32. We start with the lemma: if an n-port
is reciprocal for almost all p and satisfies r < n, it is well defined. From r < n and the
inequality r > n established in 26, one deduces r = n. It remains to establish
the existence of a hybrid matrix. This amounts to showing that it is impossible
at some port I to specify both variables v1 and i1 independently. Assume such
a port exists and set all other independent variables equal to zero. Any other
port, where one variable at least has thus been made zero, does not contribute
to the sum (2.27). There may remain some ports, such ass, where neither
Vs nor is is zero; these variables are then linear functions of v1 and ii by
(37)
If the determinant of the system (37) were different from zero, (37) could be
solved to express v1 aad ii in terms of v8 and i8 , which could thus be chosen
as simultaneous independent variables; this contradicts our initial assumption
that all independent variables other than v1 and i1 have been made zero.
As a result, the determinant is zero, and (37) implies v8 = ks is, for all values
of v1, i1 • The contribution of port s then disappears identically in the sum
(2.27), and reciprocity reduces to vp1 ia1 = ip1 va1, which is absurd, since by
hypothesis all four values are independent.
35. The main theorem, stating that a concrete reciprocal n-port is well-de.fined is
proved by recurrence as in 32, the only difference being that the appeal to
passivity is replaced by an appeal to reciprocity when one is establishing that
at least four equations are consumed in the elimination of the variables at
some interconnected ports I and 2. If i2 cannot be eliminated, the n-port
accepts states with i2 arbitrary and ii = -i2. Consider such a state, and set
all remaining dependent variables (one per port) equal to zero; this reduces
the requirement of reciprocity to
Vp1 ia1 + Vp2 ia2 - ip1 Va1 - ip2 Va2 =
-(vp1 -Vp2)ia2 + (va1 - Va2)ip2 =0
Dimensionality of concrete n-ports 79
or
VtJI - V{J2 Val - Vaz
Z(J2 Za2
so ( v1 - v2) /i2 is a constant k. For k -=I- 0, the use of (36) produces i2 = 0, so

i 2 is not arbitrary, contrary to our assumption. Consequently, k = 0, and
(36) is redundant.
36. A reciprocal element, frozen at any arbitrary Po, remains reciprocal.

Any concrete reciprocal n-port, frozen at Po, remains concrete reciprocal,
thus well-defined, and one has r0= n for all p. The local concrete dimensionality
of a concrete reciprocal n-port is n everywhere.
37. Theorems 32 and 35 state that a concrete n-port is certainly well-defined
if it is concretely passive or reciprocal (or both). Ill-defined n-ports must,
therefore, contain both negative elements and gyrators, and this was the case
for the norator and the nullator. For a frequency-independent ill-defined
one-port, one negative resistance and one gyrator are not sufficient, since the
equations remain formally identical if the sign of the negative resistance is
changed, and the one-port is then passive and well-defined. Consequently,
an ill-defined frequency-independent n-port must contain at least one gyrator,
one positive resistance, and one negative resistance. The norator and nullator
are thus the simplest examples.
38. The local concrete and abstract dimensionalities of a concrete lossless n-port are
constant: r0= r0 = n. In 33, we proved r0 = r0= n in Rep> 0 for a concrete
passive n-port, the proof being based on 24, 27, 31, and 32 which only made
use of the property of passivity
Rew>0 for Rep> 0 (38)
and the hypothesis of concreteness. By 2.36, a concrete lossless n-port satisfies
Rew<0 for Rep <0 (39)
If one replaces (38) by (39) in all mentioned proofs, one similarly establishes
r0 = r 0 = n in Rep ::;; 0, provided the positive unit terminations used in 24
are replaced by negative unit resistances.
39. An abstract lossless n-port which does not sati.if.y ro = n for all p admits no
concrete passive realization. The theorem is stronger than the previous one be-
cause it excludes all passive (even lossy) realizations. Since the n-port is
abstractly lossless, it satisfies Re w = 0 for all states on Rep = 0, but this
does not exclude the presence of resistances in the realization, as mentioned
at the end of 2.36. What has to be proved is that, in spite of this additional
freedom (which leaves the n-port abstractly, but not concretely, lossless, so
that the previous theorem does not apply), the conclusions of the previous
theorem still hold true. Since no active power can be absorbed through the
ports in steady-state, no power can be dissipated in the internal resistances,
and the current must be zero in each resistance at all real frequencies. The
internal currents are some entries of x in the complete n-port equations
Fx = 0, and the requirement of zero currents in all resistances imposes certain
linear relations between the remaining entries of x. These relations must hold
for all p = jw, thus for all p, even complex, since the entries of F are poly-
nomials in p of finite degree; as a consequence, the currents in the internal
resistances vanish for all p, the resistances can be replaced by open circuits
without altering the external n-port behavior, and the n-port is equivalent
to a concrete lossless n-port.
Uncontrollable states
40. In 40-52, we consider well-defined (abstract or concrete) n-ports and
investigate under what conditions their local dimensionalities can be different
from n. The discussion in 40-45 is based on the n-port equation (3) with
G = [A, -B] as in 11 and is, therefore, limited to the abstract local dimen-
sionality. Although the normal rank of G is n, it may fall locally at Po to
r 0 < n, and we now discuss the physical interpretation of this possibility. By
A.82, a local rank reduction occurs iff A and B have a common left divisor K
(a square polynomial matrix of dimension n) such that det K = p - Po.
41. By writing G = KG1, Eq. (3) becomes KG1u = 0. Since det K is p -Po,
the solution of this equation in terms of the vector G1u is
(40)
where a is an n-vector depending on at least one arbitrary parameter. This
arbitrary parameter is independent of the terminal conditions at the ports,
since terminations have not yet been considered, so its value cannot be deter-
mined by excitation through the ports but depends only on the initial internal
state of the n-port. If the n-port was initially at rest, all integration constants
are zero, and (40) reduces to G1 u = 0 which is the same equation as (3) with
the factor K disregarded. If the n-port was not initially at rest, additional free
states of the form ePot exist; since these states cannot be excited through the
ports, they are called uncontrollable free states. 7 In other words, if the n-port is
considered as a black box, the uncontrollable states can be excited only by
penetrating inside the box. If this is forbidden, the internal initial conditions
can be specified only at the time of construction of the black box. An n-port
Uncontrollable states 81
initially constructed with zero values for all state variables is called zero-state.
In a zero-state n-port, all stable uncontrollable free states (if any) remain
unexcited since they are initially zero by construction, and cannot be excited
from the ports by the definition of uncontrollability.
42. In the transformation of (4) into (5), where Z = A- 1B, the common left
factor K contained in A and B appears on the right-hand side of A- 1 and
cancels in the result. This also holds true for admittance and hybrid matrices,
since K is a common factor of all submatrices of dimension n of G. This means
that uncontrollable free states of an n-port disappear in its hybrid (impedance, ad-
mittance) matrix description. On the other hand, the n-ports defined by (3) or
by KGu = 0 are not equivalent, for K is not unimodular. As a consequence,
the specification ofa hybrid matrix does not define uniquely an n-port, within
equivalence, since it is unable to distinguish between nonequivalent n-ports
differing in their uncontrollable free states. Equation (3) and the equation
KGu = 0 are, however, equivalent for almost all p, that is, except at the zeros
of det K, and the corresponding n-ports are, therefore, called weakly equivalent:
they accept identical states for almost all p, and differ only in that additional
uncontrollable states are accepted by then-port based on KG. To conclude:
a well-defined n-port is uniquely defined by its hybrid matrix, within weak equivalence.
Moreover, if two zero-state n-ports are weakly equivalent, they are equivalent for all
states since the uncontrollable states by which they might differ are never
excited.
43. A well-defined n-port without uncontrollable states is called completely

controllable. The rank of the matrix G is constant and equal to n for all p,
and G accepts no left divisor K. If G is arbitrarily partitioned into two square
submatrices A and B, these submatrices are thus left-coprime and G is left-
prime. To conclude, the n-port (3) is completely controllable ijf G is left-prime. A
well-defined n-port is weakly equivalent to a unique reduced form defined as follows:
for some partition of G into A and B, with A not identically singular (such a
partition exists, for it corresponds to a hybrid matrix), extract from A and B
their g.c.l.d. D, and take the quotients D- 1A, D- 1B as new submatrices. The
reducedform is completely controllable.
44. In a theory of n-ports where weak equivalence is accepted (thus, in

particular, if all n-ports are considered as zero-state), a treatment based on
the hybrid matrix is perfectly satisfactory, and the elimination process of 3
based on the unimodular transformation into a row-echelon form is not
needed; once nonunimodular transformations (that is, division by poly-
nomials) are accepted, the hybrid matrjx can be computed by ordinary
algebraic elimination. The correct polynomial equations of form (3) are,
however, lost in such a process, Suppose. for instance, that an impedance

matrix Z has been obtained by algebraic elimination, and set Z = N/d,
where d is the least common denominator of the entries of Z, and where N
is the matrix of the numerators. Equation (5) can be written dv = Ni, but
identification with (4) by A = din, B = N is generally not allowed because
din and N may have parasitic common left divisors introduced by the alge-
braic elimination. The reduced form of then-port can, however, be restored,
since A and Bare left-coprime in that form: if D is the g.c.l.d. of din and N,
one then has A= dD- 1 , B = D- 1 N for the reduced form.
45. By 24, a passive n-port has no uncontrollable states in Rep 2 0, so all

uncontrollable free states are true transients. If the n-port is considered as a
black box existing since t = - oo, all such states will have decayed to zero at
any finite epoch, and every passive n-port existing since t = - oo is zero-state.
Internal variables
46. Consider the equation
(41)
contained in (2), which must be solved for Xa if one wishes to compute the
internal variables for some admissible state at the ports, thus for a given
xp = u satisfying (3). By reference to (1 ), system (41) contains 2k - n - p equa-
tions in 2(k - n) unknowns. The normal rank of the system is 2k - n - p,
since in the row-echelon form the first nonzero entry in each row is strictly
nonzero. For the same reason, one necessarily has 2(k - n) > 2k - n - p,
thus p > n; so system (41) is always compatible, but is indeterminate for p > n,
and the internal variables can be expressed in terms of the port variables and
of p - n linearly independent arbitrary functions of time. The following pro-
cedure permits one to separate the p - n arbitary solutions. Apply a uni-
modular transformationy = T- 1xa to the internal variables. The term HaaXa
of (41) becomes (HaaT)( T- 1 xa) = Ky with K = Haa T. Choose Tso that K
is in column-echelon form (this means that the transpose K' = T 'Haa has been
brought into row-echelon form). Since K has a normal rank equal to its
number of rows, its last p - n columns contain only zero entries, so that K
is partitioned into
(2k -n -p)(p -n)
(2k-n-p) [ Ka O ]
Let y be similarly partitioned into Ya and Yb. System (41) becomes
Kaya +HapXp = 0 (42)

.,
Internal variables 83
and the variables Yb have disappeared altogether in all equations, so they are
arbitrary, and (42) is the reduced system replacing (41). In (42), Ka is
square of dimension 2k - n - p and not identically singular, so (42) can be
transformed into an equivalent system where Ka is upper triangular.
47. The internal variables are computed by xa = Ty from the vector y whose
subvector Ya is a solution of (42) and thus depends on xp, whereas the sub-
vector Yb is arbitrary. Conversely,yb does not affect xp, so that the port states
are not altered by making Yb = 0. The entries ofYb are thus ignorable as re-
gards external behavior. When an n-port has ignorable variables, the ter-
minated n-port is an ill-defined network for all possible terminations, but
the indetermination, because of the ignorable variables, is purely internal:
in the terminated network, the port variables may still be determinate (for
suitable terminations), and then-port is then well-defined in accordance with
9. Ignorable variables appear, for instance, when the n-port contains an
isolated short-circuited loop. Although this does not occur in a Kirchhoff
n-port when its complete equations are derived from its standard form, it
may occur in various disguised ways for generalized n-ports, as mentioned in
2.55. The reduction of (41) to (42) is actually an indirect standardization
which suppresses the ignorable variables. In the following, we will assume
that this reduction has been performed, and return to the notations of (41)
where we now assume that Haa is square and not identically singular, because
this is the necessary and sufficient condition for the absence of ignorable
variables. Since the rank of
(43)
is the rank of Haa, and equal to the dimension of Haa which is the number
of internal variables, and since the transformation, discussed in 3, of the
general equations Fx = 0 into the row-echelon form Hx = 0 is unimodular,
the absence of ignorable variables can also be judged on the general equa-
tions: the n-port of complete equations Fx = 0 contains no ignorable variables if! the
columns ef F corresponding to the internal variables Xa are linearly independent.
48. Having separated the ignorable variables, we resume the discussion on

the reduced system (41) where Haa is now square and not identically singular.
Since xp is given, the general solution of (41) is the sum of a particular
solution of (41) and of the general solution of the homogeneous system
(44)
Since Haa is not identically singular, the free solutions of (44) occur at the
zeros of det Haa. Since they correspond to xp = 0 in (41 ), these free solutions
are inobservable at the ports. lnobservable states occur, for instance, when the
n-port is composed of two separate subnetworks, one of them inaccessible
from outside. A similar situation may occur in various more or less disguised
ways, for instance when the two subnetworks are connected to opposite pairs
of vertices of a balanced bridge. A concrete n-port is completely observable if it
has neither ignorable nor inobservable states, that is, if Hrxrx is unimodular.
The concept of complete observability has meaning only for a concrete
n-port whose full internal description is given, in contrast with the concept
of complete controllability, which was defined in 43 both for abstract and
concrete n-ports. Any concrete n-port leading, after elimination of the internal
variables, to some equation (3) relating the external variables alone, is called
a realization of the abstract n-port defined by (3). One may thus speak of a
completely observable realization of an abstract n-port.
49. We now return to the general equation Fx = 0 of3 and denote by Frx the
submatrix of F (all rows) formed by the columns corresponding to the internal
variables. The transformation of Finto the row-echelon form Hof ( 1) gives
with T unimodular. This shows that Frx is divisible by Hrxrx on the right.
Conversely, (43) is T- 1Frx, and this shows that every right factor of Frx
divides Hrxrx on the right. Consequently, Hrxrx is unimodular iff Frx is prime on
the right and a concrete n-port ef complete equations Fx = 0 is completely observable
ijJ the columns ef F corresponding to the internal variables form a submatrix which is
prime on the right.
50. Consider an n-port having inobservable states, and let Po be a zero of

det Harx. For a state of frequency Po, exponential at the ports, the forced
solution Xrx of (41) may be either exponential or secular, as discussed in 2.22.
If the forced solution is exponential, the integration constants contained in
the free solution of (44) are determined only by the initial values of some
internal variables, and the free solution is thus independent of the port
variables. In such a case, the inobservable state is also uncontrollable. On
the other hand, if the forced solution is secular, the corresponding state of
then-port is only internally secular, in accordance with the definition of2.25.
Consequently, inobservable states are either uncontrollable or internally secular, and
a criterion for distinguishing between these two types will now be derived.
Let Harx be transformed into its Smith form by Hrxrx = PEQ. With
Ya=QxrxandK=P- 1HrxfJ, (41) becomes
(45)
Internal variables 85
By (2.19), an internally secular state at a zero Po of det Haa = det E exists iff
rank[£, Kxp] >rank E atp 0 (46)
Since E is diagonal, some of its entries ei vanish at p0 • Condition (46) only
holds if at least one of the entries of the vector Kxp in the same rows as the
zero entries of Eis not zero. Letyy c/= 0 be the subvector of Kxp formed by the
rows corresponding to zeros in E. Designating by Ky the submatrix of K
corresponding to the same rows, one has
Kyxp =yy (47)
On the other hand, xp is an external state and satisfies (3), that is,
Gxp=0 (48)
A solution xp of (47-48) with yY c/= 0 exists iff the rows of K are linearly
independent of the rows of G, which means
rank [ ~Y] > rank G at Po (49)
Consider, on the other hand, the complete system of equations (45) and
(48) yielding the matrix
(50)
playing the role of H in ( 1). If the matrix (50) is frozen at p0 , some rows of
E are zero and these correspond to the rows Ky of K. Consequently, the
elimination process applied to the frozen n-port will produce
(51)
instead of G in the n-port equations, and the rank of (51) at Po is the local
concrete dimensionality as defined in 7. Finally, (49) simply expresses
rb > r0 • We have thus proved that an n-port has an internally secular state at
Po ijf its local concrete dimensionality exceeds its local abstract dimensionality.
51. The last theorem combined with theorem 33 shows that a concrete
passive n-port has no internally secular states in Rep :2 0, thus generalizing a
result of 2.25. For a concrete reciprocal n-port, one has rb = n everywhere,
by 36, so one may have rb > r0 only if r0 < n, that is, if an uncontrollable
state also exists at the same Po: a concrete reciprocal n-port only accepts internally
secular states and uncontrollable states simultaneously. Combining this result with
the restriction caused by passivity, one obtains the theorem: a concrete
passive reciprocal n-port can only have internally polynomial states and uncontrollable
states, simultaneously, in Rep < 0. Finally, by 38, a concrete lossless n-port has
neither uncontrollable nor internally secular states.
52. For a matrix Hin its row-echelon form ( l) one has

rank H = rank Ha.a.+ rank HfJfJ
so that the rank of H falls locally below its normal rank either for inobserv-
able states (owing to a local decrease of rank Ha.a.) or for uncontrollable
states (owing to a local decrease of rank HfJfJ). Since His deduced from the
general matrix F in 3 by a unimodular transformation, one has rank F =
rank H, and a local decrease of rank F indicates either an inobservable or
an uncontrollable state, or both. Let F be partitioned into [Fa., F fJ] where
Fa. contains the columns corresponding to the internal variables, as in 49.
For an inobservable state, one has
rank Fa. <n (52)
by 49. Consequently, a local rank decrease of F indicates the presence of an inob-
servable state if (52) holds and of an observable uncontrollable state otherwise. If the
local rank decrease of F is larger than the local rank decrease of Fa. , both
kinds of states coexist.
Examples
53. We first consider the one-port of Fig. 5. The downward current at the
il
~ ~ v,
1 • •
L
vt ~
R
R
1'
Fm. 3.5
gyrator input is i - h, and the output voltage is thus v1 = -R(i - h); as a

consequence, the downward current in the output resistance is v1/R = h - i,
and the current in the gyrator is i; finally, the input voltage of the gyrator is
v=Ri (53)
Examples 87
This shows that the one-port is equivalent to a resistance R and has, there-
fore, the constant local abstract dimensionality ro = 1. The equation of the
inductance is v - v1 = Lph; using the above expression of v1, and (53), it
becomes
2v= (Lp +R)h (54)
The system (53, 54) written
[Lp:R (55)
is in row-echelon form. The submatrix Haa vanishes for p = -R/L, but the
rank of the remaining two columns is 2. As a consequence, one has r 0= 1
everywhere except for p = -R/L, where r 0= 2. This proves that the expo-
nential state e-Rt/L at the port is internally secular. It is easily checked that,
for p = -R/L, Eq. (54) considered as a differential equation in p = d/dt
accepts the solution
h =(ho+ 2vt/L)e-Rt/L (56)
Even if the initial current ho is zero, an external purely exponential state
excites in the internal variable (56) a secular state. If the one-port of Fig. 5
is frozen at Po= -R/L, the impedance Lpo becomes -R, and the one-port
reduces to the nullator discussed in 29 (Fig. 4 with reversed gyrator). This
is also checked in the equations: (54) gives v = 0, and (53) then gives i = 0.
It is, however, not true to say that the one-port of Fig. 5 behaves locally as
a nullator, because a reasoning based on freezing differential equations into
algebraic frequency-independent equations is incorrect: the local rank
variation in the algebraic equations is merely a symptom of the appearance
of the internally secular state.
54. The simplest example of a one-port having one uncontrollable free

state is the transpose of Fig. 5 (gyrator reversed). One now has v1 = R(i -h);
the current in R is v1/R = i - h, and the downward current in the gyrator
output is 2h - i, so (53) is replaced by
v=R(i-2h) (57)
On the other hand, the voltage drop on the inductance is, by (57), v - v1 =
+
v - Ri RiL, and the corresponding equation is
(R+Lp)h=0 (58)
One eliminates h between (57) and (58) by multiplying (57) by (R + Lp)/R
to obtain
(R +Lp)v = (R +Lp)Ri (59)
88 3. Analyiss of n-ports
which is the one-port equation. The system (57-58) is equivalent to (58-59)

which is in row-echelon form
(60)
The one-port has dimensionality 1, but the local abstract dimensionality falls
to r 0 = 0 at p = -R/L, so that the state e-Rt/L is uncontrollable. If the
common factor in (59) is dropped, (59) reduces to (53), so the one-port
is weakly equivalent to a resistance. On the other hand, the submatrix
Hrxrx = 2R in (60) is unimodular, and there are no inobservable states. When
the one-port is frozen at p = -R/L, it reduces to the norator of Fig. 4. Con-
trary to the situation described in the previous example where local nullator
behavior was not obtained because of the appearance of a term tePt in the
internal behavior, the local norator behavior is strictly true in the present
case, but needs careful interpretation. The solution of (58) is iL = iL 0 e-Rt/L
and shows that this uncontrollable transient is, indeed, unaffected by the
terminal condition at the port. The initial value ho of h thus determines
iL for all time, and (57) then gives one relation between v and i, which is
the equation of the one-port. Equation (59) is merely the differentiated
form of this equation, where iLo is eliminated, so that it describes the one-
port for all possible initial values ho. If one considers the same one-port
with different initial values as distinct one-ports, the equation can be kept in
the form v = R(i - 2iL0e-Rt/L) and is not differential; in particular, if
iLo = 0 (in zero-state), h remains zero for all time, and the equation reduces
to v = Ri; the uncontrollable transient thus can never be excited from the
port. The initial value iLo can, however, only be specified by penetrating
inside the black box and, if this is forbidden, the one-port must be con-
sidered as being in an unknown initial state and described by the differen-
tiated form (59) of the equation which thus characterizes, in a sense, a
whole class of one-ports. This is what produces the additional freedom
characteristic of norator behavior.
55. In the one-port of Fig. 6, with Li = L2, the part on the right-hand side
of22' is the one-port of Fig. 5, equivalent to a resistance R; as a consequence,
the one-port of Fig. 6 is externally equivalent to the one-port of the last
example and is characterized by Eq. (59); so it accepts an uncontrollable
state because of the effect at port l of the initial current in L1. On the other
hand, for ordinary states v = Ri at port l (corresponding to h = 0 in L1),
the 2-port of ports l and 2 of Fig. 6 is transparent, and the same values of
v and i appear at port 2. The one-port on the right-hand side of 22' is then
analyzed as in the first example, and an internally secular state of the form
Examples 89
L1 2 L2
1 • • • •
.-R -+-
R
R
,.
2'
FIG. 3.6
(56) appears in L 2 • This illustrates a case where an uncontrollable state

and an internally secular state appear simultaneously at p = -R/L.
56. Another example of the same confluence is the one-port of Fig. 7, where
we assume L/C = R 2• The equation of the series RL branch is
(R +LP)h = V (61)
The downward current in the RC branch is i - h , and the voltage
drop on the resistance in series with C is R(i -h) = v - ve, so one has
ve = v - R(i - h). The capacitance equation is thus
Cp[v -R(i -h)] = i -iL
or, replacing C by L/R2,
Lpv = (R +Lp)Ri - (R +Lp)Rh (62)
~
( V) 1o---------.
R R
L C
(0) 1 · ~ - - - - -
FIG. 3.7
Elimination of iL with (61) yields (59). The final system (61, 59) is, m
row-echelon form,
R+Lp -l
[·---------------- ----------- (63)
0 R+Lp
The one-port equation is (59), of dimensionality 1, but the local abstract

dimensionality To falls to O at p = -R/L, so there is an uncontrollable state.
On the other hand, the rank of the matrix in (63) is 1 at p = -R/L, so
one has To= l, thus To >To' and there is an internally secular state similar
to (56). Actually, (61) is identical to (54) except for the factor 2. It is inter-
esting to see what the one-port of Fig. 7 becomes when p is frozen at some
value Po, so the elements Land Care replaced by resistances. For Po =J= -R/L,
the common factor in (59) may be suppressed, and the one-port is equivalent
to a resistance R. On the other hand, for Po= -R/L, Eq. (59) becomes
indeterminate, but (61) gives v = 0, as is obvious from Fig. 7, since both
L and C are replaced by -R for the value of p0 considered; so the one-port
reduces to a short circuit. The frozen one-port is thus well-defined even
at Po= -R/L. This is because the normal dimensionality T = l is replaced
by the concrete dimensionality T~ = l at Po= -R/L in the algebraic treat-
ment. Although the concrete dimensionality is l for allp (it must be constant
for a reciprocal n-port), there appears a discontinuity in the network de-
scription, since the normal equation (53) is suddenly replaced by v = 0 at
Po= -R/L.
57. All the examples analyzed in this section are realizations of the resis-
tance R, but they are incompletely observable or incompletely controllable,
or both. Moreover, among the inobservable realizations we only treated
those with internally secular states, since other inobservable states can be
trivially introduced by incorporating into the n-port an arbitrary separate
subnetwork. It is impossible to construct similar nontrivial realizations for an
inductance or a capacitance, with the help of passive elements, owing to the
last theorem of 51 which forbids uncontrollable states and internally secular
states in a lossless one-port. Note, however, that the one-port defined by
(R + Lp)v = (R + Lp)Lp i is abstractly lossless, for it satisfies the defi-
nition of 2.36, but has no passive concrete realization, owing to 39. A
nonpassive realization is obtained by connecting the elements -R and
L in series with the one-port of Fig. 7: from (59) written with v1 instead
of v and from the equation v2 = ( -R + Lp)i of the additional series
elements multiplied by R + Lp on both sides, one deduces, by addition,
+
(R Lp) (v1 + v2) = (R + Lp)Lp i; substituting the total voltage v1 + v2 = v,
one obtains the announced equation.
chapter 4
Basic structures and transformations
Introduction
1. Kirchoff networks were introduced in Chap. l and analyzed in Chap. 2
where the discussion of their basic properties led to generalizations involving
new elements. A network becomes an n-port when generators are considered
as external (some network theorems were already expressed as n-port
theorems in Chap. 2) and when the internal variables are eliminated. The
elimination problem was discussed in Chap. 3; the behavior of well-defined
n-ports was contrasted with various pathological cases and their locally
singular behavior (inobservable or uncontrollable states) was characterized.
2. A concrete passive n-port is always well-defined and, when terminated

on another passive n-port, it forms a passive network which is always stable.
On the other hand, amplifying devices are often active and nonreciprocal,
so that they can produce pathological or unstable behavior. Passive networks
thus occupy a central and privileged position in network theory. The
remainder of this book is devoted exclusively to the analysis of passive
concrete networks and n-ports, and to the synthesis of abstract passive
n-ports, although many methods and results have, in fact, a wider field of
application. Moreover, since ill-defined abstract passive n-ports are not
realizable by means of concrete passive elements, we will treat only well-
defined n-ports, without further mention of this restriction.
3. The discussion of n-ports in Chaps. 2 and 3 was in terms of polynomial

matrices, so every algebraic equation could be reinterpreted as a differential
91
92 4. Basic structures and transformations
equation. This method was indispensable for a correct derivation of various

fundamental theorems, but it required a rather heavy treatment based on
unimodular transformations. The n-ports constructed for practical applica-
tions are most often completely controllable and completely observable, for
uncontrollable or inobservable behavior serves no useful purpose. Conse-
quently, the treatment based on rational matrices (hybrid, impedance,
admittance) is perfectly satisfactory, as mentioned in 3.44, and will be
adopted from now on, except in a few isolated instances; in particular, a
one-port will always be characterized by its impedance or admittance.
4. The present chapter is devoted to the analysis of various usual combina-

tions of one-port elements and ideal transformers. In particular, we establish
a number of equivalent circuits and of simple transformations which will
later appear useful in many problems of analysis and synthesis. Moreover,
our treatment is occasionally formal in the sense that the particular analytical
nature (positive functions of p) of the admittances and impedances of passive
one-ports is temporarily left out of consideration. On the other hand, some
elementary synthesis problems will be solved at this stage.
5. In many practical cases, all terminals of low potential ( l ', 2', ... , n') of
an n-port are joined together to form a single terminal (the ground); the
n-port then has n terminals of high potential and one ground terminal and
is, therefore, called an (n + 1)-terminal subnetwork or a grounded n-port. Con-
versely, any (n + 1)-terminal subnetwork can be considered as a grounded
n-port, when one arbitrary terminal is taken as reference. Since grounded
n-ports are not true n-ports, they do not necessarily behave as n-ports in
interconnections: the difficulties mentioned in 1.60 and 1.69 may arise, but
can always be avoided by the insertion of isolating transformers. In particular,
such precautions must be taken before applying the rules of 3.15. However,
when several grounded n-ports are paralleled so that their ground terminals
coincide, the resulting n-port is also grounded, and no isolating transformers
are necessary.
6. The dual of an n-port was defined in 2.44. Since duality interchanges

normalized currents and voltages, the normalized impedance matrix of an n-port
(if it exists) is the normalized admittance matrix of the dual n-port, and conversely.
It was also mentioned in 2.43 that the dual of the 2-port of Fig. 1.16 (straight
connection from input to output) is the 2-port of Fig. 1.17 (twisted connec-
tion). Since the 2-port of Fig. 1.16 is implicitly present inside any grounded
2-port, the dual of a concrete grounded 2-port without transformers will
always contain a twist, which prevents the dual 2-port from being grounded
without an isolating transformer. It is, therefore, useful to introduce the
Introduction 93
notion of the twisted dual of a 2-port: it is the dual with a change of polarity
at one port.
7. The analysis of networks containing only series and parallel connections

is particularly easy. Consider, for instance, the 2-port of Fig. 1. Its input
Fm. 4.1
impedance Z is Z 1 in series with the combined impedance Z' of the following

elements: the admittance Y' = 1/Z' is Y2 = l/Z2 in parallel with the
admittance Y" of the remaining elements starting with Z3. One thus
obtains the continuedjraction '
Z=Z1+----
(1)
Grounded 2-ports having the structure of Fig. 1 are called ladder 2-ports or
grounded series-parallel 2-ports. Obviously, any branch of a ladder structure
may itself be a series-parallel combination of several impedances, as is
shown in the example of Fig. 2. The dual of this 2-port is easily obtained by
z,
..,___ _ _-02
1•n-________,._____..,___--02'
Fm. 4.2
the procedure of 2.45 and leads to Fig. 3 after the removal of the twist. It
is obvious that series branches are simply replaced by dual shunt branches,
'I
'!
1
R2tz1
R2tz2
1'
Fm. 4.3
i'
and conversely. Consequently, the twisted dual of a ladder 2-port is a ladder
2-port, and its construction is immediate.
Congruence transformations
8. An ideal transformer k-port of rank r and ratio matrix N whose r shunt ports are
closed on an r-port of impedance matrix Z forms a (k - r)-port of impedance matrix
N'ZN. The k-port equations are (1.27) and (1.30), whereas the termination
on Z imposes Va= -Zia. Elimination of Va and ia gives, succesively,
Vb= N'va = -N'Zia = N'ZNib, thus showing that N'ZN is the resulting
impedance matrix at the series ports of subscript b. In particular, in the scalar
case, an impedance Z seen through a 2-port transformer ofratio n/1 becomes
n2 Z. A similar proof is immediate for the dual theorem: An ideal transformer
k-port of rank r and ratio matrix N whose k - r series ports are closed on a (k - r)-
port of admittance matrix Y forms an r-port of admittance matrix NYN'. Note that
N is replaced by N' in the dual theorem. Note also that the admittance
matrix may not exist in the first case nor the impedance matrix in the
second. If N and Y are square and nonsingular in the second theorem, the
resulting impedance matrix is (NYN')- 1 = N-1 ZN- 1 , and it appears that
N has been replaced by N-1 with respect to the first theorem; this corre-
sponds to the interchange between series and shunt ports in the statement
of the theorems. A particular case of the first theorem, where Z is the
diagonal impedance matrix pA of r separate inductances, gives (1.36).
9. Consider a real passive reciprocal frequency-independent n-port. If it

has an impedance or admittance matrix, this matrix is symmetric constant
and positive real in the sense of 3.18 but, for a constant symmetric matrix,
Congruence transformations 95
this simply means that the matrix is positive definite. Let R be a real sym-
metric p.d. matrix of dimension n and rank r. By A.34--37, it is of the form
+
R = T' (!J,,.r On-r) T with !J,,.r diagonal strictly p.d. As in 1.64, one transforms
this into R = N' !J,,.r N, where N is an (r · n)-submatrix of T. By the first
theorem of 8, then-port of impedance matrix R is realizable as a transformer
+
(n r)-port of ratio matrix N terminated on r positive resistances. By A.37,
the representation is not redundant, so a more economic realization is
+
impossible; the total number of parameters is r(2n - r l) /2 by A.25 and
comprises r resistances and r(2n - r - l) /2 turn ratios, some of which may
be O or I. The element values are deduced explicitly from (A.42) and (A.44).
A similar process works for a prescribed admittance matrix G, owing to
the second theorem of 8. A realization is called canonic when it is available
for any n-port of a given class and when a more economical realization does
not exist for an arbitrary n-port of the class. We have thus proved that a
real passive reciprocal constant n-port ef prescribed impedance or admittance matrix
+
of rank r is canonically realizable as an ideal transformer (n r)-port containing at
most r(2n - r - l) /2 ratios, closed on r positive resistances.
10. If, instead of being constant, the prescribed impedance matrix is of

the form pL, where L is a real constant symmetric positive definite matrix,
the above synthesis procedure coincides with the one described in 1.64 for
inductance n-ports. Similarly, one obtains a synthesis procedure for capaci-
tance n-ports, when the prescribed admittance matrix is of the form pC.
11. The two theorems of 8 will now be applied to the case where N is a
path-set matrix of a graph. The graph has r tree branches and q = k - r
links. To apply the first theorem, we assume that the sth tree branch contains
an impedance Zs and that there are no mutual impedances, so Z is a diagonal
matrix of entries Z 8 • The impedance matrix of the q-port whose ports are
the links is, then, N'ZN, of entries
n
Zii = L ns,ns1Zs; i =f.}
8=1
(2)
r
Zu = L n:izs
8=1
In the second equation, n~ is l if the branch Zs occurs in the ith path, and
0 otherwise, so that Ztt is the total series impedance <if the ith path. In the first
equation, n8 , n81 is ± l if Z 8 is common to the ith andjth paths, and O other-
wise; moreover, the sign is positive or negative depending on whether the
positive directions of paths i andj coincide or not; hence Z,1 is the sum efthe
impedances common to paths i and j counted positively if the directions ef paths i and j
coincide, and negatively otherwise.
As an example, the impedance matrix of the resistance tree of Fig.

1.15 (where the sth tree branch is supposed to be a resistance Rs, and where
the links 6, 7, 8, 9, form the ports in that order) is
R1+R2 R1
R1 +R2 +Ra R1+Ra
R1+Ra R1 +Ra+R4
R1 R1+R4
12. In the dual theorem, we assume that the sth cotree branch of a network
without mutual impedance contains the admittance Y8 • The admittance
matrix of the r-port whose ports are the tree branches is then NYN', of
entries
q
Ytj = L nts n1s Ys; i "=F j
s=l
(3)
Formulas (3) are most often used in a particular case to be discussed

now. Consider a network of r +1 nodes, the last node being the ground,
as a grounded r-port (defined in 5). The ports themselves constitute r
additional branches and these form a complete tree in the enlarged network,
since they radiate from the ground to the other r nodes and since their
+
number is r for a network of r 1 nodes. Consequently, the branches of the
original network form a cotree of the enlarged network. The reduced node-
to-branch incidence matrix (omitting the row corresponding to the ground
node) of the enlarged network is the reduced node-to-branch incidence
matrix M of the original network bordered by r additional columns corre-
sponding to the port branches. Since each of these is only incident to one
node (the ground has been omitted) and is oriented towards this node, the
additional columns form the unit matrix lr. The incidence matrix of the
enlarged network is thus in normal form, and the matrix N to be used in
(3) is simply the matrix M of the original network. With this identification,
nt is 1 only if branch s meets node i, so Yu is the sum of the admittances meeting
node i. On the other hand, YtJ is the negative sum ef the admittances joining nodes
i and j, because these are the only branches for which nts and n1 8 are not
simultaneously zero, and have opposite signs.
As an example, the admittance matrix of the 3-port of Fig. 4 (with
node 4 as ground) is
(4)
Elementary 2-port structures 97
1 3
25
Fm. 4.4
An equation such as
resulting from the first admittance equation based on (4) is immediately

interpreted: the current i 1 entering through node 1 splits into a current
Y3 v1 to ground, a current Y1(v1 - v2) to node 2 and a current Y6(v1 - v3)
to node 3.
Elementary 2-port structures

13. Consider the so-called T-structure of Fig. 5. The 2-port is a tree, and its
impedance matrix, computed by the method of 11, is
(5)
Its determinant is
(6)
and the admittance matrix is
(7)
1 2
1'n-----......-----02'
FIG. 4.5
If d = 0 (this occurs, for instance, for Za = Zc = 0, that is, when the T

reduces to its shunt branch), the admittance matrix does not exist.
14. The TT-structure of Fig. 6 is a (2 + 1)-terminal network, so the method
,~------1
z~
1'0---......--------ci 2'
FIG. 4.6
of 12 applies. The admittance matrix of the 2-port is
(8)
Its determinant
vanishes, for instance, for Y; = Y~ = 0, i.e., when the 2-port reduces to its
series branch alone.
15. Identifying (7) and (8), one obtains immediately Y,; = Zb/ d, and then
Y; +Yi= (Zb + Zc)/d, thus Y; = Zc/d, and similarly, Y~ = Zafd. As a
Elementary 2-port structures 99
result, the 2-ports of Figs. 5 and 6 are equivalent if their elements are
related by
+
Z' = ZaZb ZaZc ZbZc + (9)
a Za
and by the two other formulas cyclically deduced from (9). Similarly, the
formulas expressing the elements of Fig. 5 in terms of the elements of Fig. 6
are obtained by replacing impedances by admittances everywhere, so (9)
turns into
Y' b
y_a Y' + Y'aY'c + Y'bY'e
a- Y'
a
which, in terms of impedances, becomes
z _ Z'Z'
b c
(10)
a - Z'+Z'+Z'
a b c
When considered as a general 3-terminal network, the network of Fig. 5

is a star, or Y-structure, whereas the network of Fig. 6 is a triangle, or ~-
The above equivalence of 3-terminal networks is known as the Y-~ transfor-
mation. If all elements are of the same nature (for instance, resistances),
the transformation formulas are such that positive elements are changed into
positive elements.
16. Consider the 2-port of Fig. 5 with the element values Za = Zc = 0 and
Zb = Z 1 /2. Its impedance matrix (5) is
( 11)
Consider next the same 2-port with Z1 replaced by some other value Z2,
and invert the polarity at port 2 (which means, for instance, inserting an
ideal transformer of ratio -1/1 at the output); its impedance matrix is
(12)
By combining both 2-ports in series, one produces the 2-port of Fig. 7 whose
impedance matrix is
(13)
17. Since det Z = Z1Z2, the inverse of (13) is

l j
I00 4. Basic structures and transformations
l o - - - - -.... ----02
'
'i 1
1'n----+----------o2'
Fm. 4.7
With the notations Y1 = 1/ Z, Y2 = 1/ Z2, it becomes
(14)
Since (14) is of the form (13), it can be similarly decomposed into admittance
matrices of the forms ( 11) and ( 12). The matrix
( 15)
is the particular case of (8) with Y~ = Y~ = 0 and Yi= Y2 /2, and its realiza-
tion is thus the 2-port of Fig. 6 reduced to the series branch Zb = 2Z2 alone.
Similarly, the second matrix is realized by inserting a transformer of ratio
-1/1, and 2-port of admittance matrix (14) is the parallel connection of
the constituent 2-ports, thus giving the 2-port of Fig. 8, which is equivalent
to the one of Fig. 7.
222
1 2
221
,. I -1
2'
Fm.4.8
Elementary 2-port structures IO I
18. In the structures of Figs. 7 and 8, the polarity reversal at port 2 in one
of the constituent 2-ports was realized with the help of a -1 /1 transformer
rather than by a permutation of terminals (twist), because a twist would
mix high potential terminals and ground terminals in the combined 2-port,
and in such a case the 2-port behavior is not preserved unless one ideal
transformer is added before the interconnection. There is, however, one
way of avoiding ideal transformers (at the cost of doubling the number of
elements) in the case of parallel connection, by using constituent structures
which are balanced with respect to ground. A 2-port structure is called balanced
if it turns into itself by changing simultaneously the polarities at both ports.
The balanced realization of the 2-port of Fig. 6 is shown in Fig. 9, and both
Za/2 Zc/2
FIG. 4.9
structures are obviously equivalent as 2-ports. If a balanced structure is

excited by balanced generators ( +vi/2 and -vi/2 at terminals I and I',
respectively), the horizontal symmetry axis (shown dotted in Fig. 9) is at
zero potential and is a virtual ground. This remains true after parallel (but
not series) interconnection of several balanced 2-ports. As a consequence,
balanced 2-ports (and more generally n-ports) can be freery interconnected in
parallel without isolating ideal transformers. Because of the symmetry with respect
to the virtual ground, the resulting structures are always equivalent to the
corresponding grounded structures, where the parallel connection is always
legitimate.
19. The realization of (15) involved a single series branch of impedance

2Z2. Its balanced realization is shown in Fig. 10. Similarly, the balanced
realization of a series branch 2Z1 with polarity reversal at one port is shown
in Fig. 11. The parallel combination gives the lattice structure of Fig. 12 which
is thus equivalent to the 2-ports of Figs. 7 and 8 and has the impedance
matrix (13).
10---0~---02 2
22
22
1'0-----101----02' 2'
FIG. 4.10 FIG. 4.11
22
FIG. 4.12
Symmetric 2-ports
20. A 2-port is called symmetric if it is electrically equivalent to itself with
ports I and 2 interchanged. In terms of the impedance matrix entries,
symmetry requires Z11 = Z22, Z12 = Z21, and a symmetric 2-port is thus
reciprocal. Since the impedance matrix ( 13) of the equivalent 2-ports of
Figs. 7, 8, and 12 satisfies the above conditions, these 2-ports are symmetric.
Conversely, the identification between ( 13) and an arbitrary symmetric
impedance matrix, which is of the form
(16)
gives
(I 7)
Conversely, (17) solved for Z1 and Z2 gives
Z1 = Z11 + Z12; Z2 = Z11 - Z12 (18)

Symmetric 2-ports 103
and gives a formal realization of an arbitrary symmetric 2-port in one of the

structures of Figs. 7, 8, and 12. Expressions (18) are thus called the lattice
impedances of the symmetric 2-port of matrix ( 16).
21. Consider the 2-port of Fig. 13 which is assumed to have a mirror
1' 2'
Fm. 4.13
electrical and geometrical symmetry with respect to the central dotted line.
Assume first that the connections cut by the symmetry line in Fig. 13 are
opened, and that equal voltages v1 = v2 are applied at both external ports.
The current entering by terminal I is then ii = v1/ Z1, where Z1 is the impe-
dance of the one-port of Fig. 14. Since the opposite end points of the opened
Fm. 4.14
connections will have equal potentials, it is equivalent to restore the connec-

tions, and the impedance equations v = Zi of the complete 2-port apply
with i1 = i2 to yield v1 = (Zn+ Z12)ii. By comparison with (18), one has
v1 = Z 1i1, and this shows that the impedance of the one-port of Fig. 14 is
the lattice impedance Z1 of the 2-port of Fig. 13. Assume now that the
2-port of Fig. 13 is energized by v1 = -vi; this produces a zero potential
on all points on the symmetry line, and it is legitimate to short-circuit all
these points. One also has i1 = -i2, and the equation v1 = ( Zu - Z12)i1 =
Z2 i1 shows, by comparison with (18), that the impedance of the one-port
of Fig. 15 is the other lattice impedance of the original symmetric 2-port
?2
1'
Fm. 4.15
We have thus proved Bartlett's theorem: the lattice impedances of the 2-port of
Fig. 13 having a mirror symmetry are the impedances of the one-ports of Figs. 14
and 15.
22. We now wish to extend the theorem 1 to the case where some of the
connections are crossed on the symmetry line, as appears for instance in
Figs. 16, 17, and 18. Consider first a single pair of twisted connections
1 2
cz
1' 2'
Fm. 4.16
(Fig. 1.17). As a 2-port, this network is equivalent to a transformer of ratio

-1, which is itself equivalent to the cascade connection of two gyrators of
equal ratios and opposite polarities by 2.41, as illustrated in the part of
Fig. 19 enclosed in dotted lines. To ensure, in addition, complete equivalence
between the networks of Fig. 1.17 and Fig. 19, one must provide galvanic
continuity for a longitudinal (or common mode) current flowing through
both wires in the same direction and closing itself through the rest of the
Symmetric 2-ports I05
1' 2'
Fm. 4.17
network in which the circuit of Fig. 1.17 is embedded. In Fig. 19, longitudinal
transmission is afforded by the additional connection joining the center-taps
of two ideal auto-transformers. Finally, the 4-terminal networks of Figs. 1.17
1 2
1' 2'
Fm. 4.18
and 19 are equivalent. We are now able to replace any pair of crossed wires
by the subnetwork of Fig. 19, which can be halved, and then apply the
original form of Bartlett's theorem.
--------
1 2
I + ....
I I R R
I
,· I 2'
L ____
Fm. 4.19
23. By 2.41, a gyrator terminated on an inductance L is equivalent to the

dual capacitance C = L/R 2, and the same proof shows that a gyrator acts as
a dualizer for more general impedances, transforming Z into R 2 /Z, hence,
in particular, an open circuit into a short circuit. Owing to this property,
when Bartlett's theorem is applied to Fig. 19, the gyrator always disappears
in the final result, but the auto-transformer remains necessary in certain
cases. The various typical situations which may occur are illustrated below
by three different cases.
Figure 16 represents the case of three connections of which one (c1c2) is
the ground, whereas the two high potential connections (a1b2, a2 bi) are
crossed. By the above method, the canonic impedances are obtained as Figs.
20a and 20b. The auto-transformer has disappeared in the first circuit, for it
a1 a,
1 2
b1 b1 II
tt c, zt c,
1' 2'
FIG. 4.20a FIG. 4.20b
is short-circuited between a1 and b1, whereas the port formed by its center-tap
and terminal a 1 is open-circuited. On the other hand, the auto-transformer
is necessary in Fig. 20b to ensure simultaneously a transversal open circuit
on a1b1 and a longitudinal short circuit to c1. Finally, the lattice impedances of the
2-port of Fig. 16 are Figs. 20a and 20b.
24, If the interconnected terminals on the symmetry line can be grouped by

pairs into ports whose terminals are balanced with respect to a common
ground, the auto-transformers always disappear. Only two kinds of crossings
can occur in that case: either the crossing occurs between high and low ter-
minals of one port and its image (as illustrated in Fig. 17, in addition to a
second straight port connection), or the crossing affects two ports which are
not images of each other, and then a second image crossing must exist
(Fig. 18).
In the first case (Fig. 17), Z1 is immediately obtained as Fig. 21 (similar
to Fig. 20a), whereas Z2 is first obtained as Fig. 22 (similar to Fig. 20b), but
the auto-transformer merely forces the potentials of a 1 and a~ to be balanced
Symmetric 2-ports 107
a,
1 2
a;
z~ b1 zi b1
b1 b1
1' 2'
Fm. 4.21 FIG. 4.22
with respect to ground (b 1 b;_) and is redundant since a1 and a;_ are already
balanced by symmetry; finally the lattice impedances ef the 2-port ef Fig. 17 are
Figs. 21 and 23. As a check, the last theorem applied to the 2-port of Fig. 12
yields correctly its constituent impedances Z1 and Z2.
a,
1 1
a;
Zi Z( a;
1' ,. b1
Fm. 4.23 FIG. 4.24
In the second case (Fig. 18), the lattice impedances are immediately
obtained as Figs. 24 and 25. In Fig. 25, the auto-transformers form the 2-port
of Fig. 26 and are simply equivalent to a single transformer of ratio -1,
1'
Fm. 4.25 FIG. 4.26

I 08 4. Basic structures and transformations
hence to a simple twist, since the balance to ground is ensured anyway.

Finally, the lattice impedances of the 2-port of Fig. 18 are Figs. 24 and 27.
a1
1
1'
Fm. 4.27
Cascade connections
25. In addition to the series-parallel interconnections treated in 3.15, It Is
often convenient to consider a cascade (or chain) connection of two subnetworks,
where the output ports of the first subnetwork are identical to the input ports
of the second subnetwork. Let Xa, Xb, and Xe be the electrical variables at the
input ports of the first subnetwork, at the interconnected ports (with some
unique polarity convention at both sides), and at the output ports of the
second subnetwork, respectively. If the equations of the first subnetwork can
be put in the form Xa = Kr Xb and the equations of the second subnetwork in
the similar form Xb = Knxc, the elimination of the internal variables in the
interconnected subnetwork is immediate, and its equations are obtained as
Xa = K1Knxc. This shows the interest of finding a form of then-port equations
where the input variables Xa are expressed in terms of the output variables,
since the hybrid equations are not of such a form. Since the number of equa-
tions of a well-defined n-port is n, there must be n variables Xa and n variables
xb; moreover, n must be even, since each vector involves as many voltages as
currents. The simple treatment of a cascade connection may thus only work
for Zn-ports having an equal number n of input ports and output ports, and
in particular for 2-ports. If the relation Xa = Kxb is written in the form
( 19)
the output vector Xb (with a sign change in ib) of (19) is the input vector to
a second subnetwork in cascade with the first. The matrix K appearing in
(19) is naturally called the chain matrix of the 2n-port, and the chain matrix of a
cascade connection of Zn-ports is the product of the individual chain matrices in the
order of connection.
Cascade connections 109
26. For 2n-ports, the chain matrix is of limited interest by itself; the restric-
tions imposed on it by passivity or reciprocity are complicated and will not
be derived. The following remarks give some relations for the 2-port case
where the input variables are v1 i1 and the output variables v2 and i2. The
relations between the impedance and chain matrix entries (when these
matrices exist) are found by writing the matrix relation v = Zi in the form
v - Zi = 0, or
0 -Zu
-Z21 - Z12]
-Z22 ~~:1z1 =
z2
o
then by permuting v2 and i1 and changing the sign of i2, to yield
0
~~~1
Z22 V2 = O
Z12]
z2
and finally by solving for the first two variables. This gives
K= -[~
-Zu]- 1
-Z21
[0I (20)
Thus
K=-1-[Zu
Z21 1
<let
Z22
z] (21)
Conversely, it results from (21) that the entries of the impedance matrix are
deduced from the entries A, B, C, D of the chain matrix by
Z21 = 1/C; Zu = A/C; Z22 = D/C; Z12 = (AD -BC)/C (22)
It also appears immediately from (20), or (21), that
(23)
so that one has <let K = 1 for a reciprocal 2-port.
Relations (21) show that K does not exist for Z21 = 0, that is, in the
case of a 2-port without connections between input and ouput. An interesting
example of a 2-port having neither impedance, nor admittance, nor chain
matrix is given by v1 = 0, i2 = 0 (input short circuit, output open circuit).
This 2-port is, however, well-defined and has a hybr-id matrix. Finally, the
chain matrix of an ideal transformer of ratio 1/ n is
(24)
27. Consider an n-port whose nb output ports are terminated on some nb-port
(defined by its impedance matrix Zb or admittance matrix Yb)- The resulting
subnetwork is an na-port, where na is the number of input ports of then-port;
we want to deduce the equations of this na-port from the equations of the
constituent subnetworks. It is sufficient to eliminate the output variables ib,
Vb between the n-port equations (deduced from some n-port matrix suitably
partitioned) and the terminating condition Vb= -Zb ib, or ib = -Yb vb;
one then obtains a homogeneous relation between the input variables which
can be identified to Va= Za ia or ia = Ya Va. Depending on which n-port
matrix is used, the elimination is easier in terms of impedances or admittances,
but at least one matrix inversion is needed in all cases. In the following wt
simply list the various most useful forms of the resulting expressions, assuming
that the involved matrix inversion is legitimate.
(a) 2n-port of chain matrix as in (19) terminated on Zb:
(25)
(b) n-port of hybrid matrix as in (38) with llb series ports terminated
on Zb:
(26)
(c) same case, but with the na shunt ports terminated on Ya at the input;
the impedance matrix seen from the output is
zb = Hbb - Hba(Haa + Ya)- 1Hab (27)
(d) n-port of impedance matrix Z terminated on Zb:
Za = Zaa - Zab(Zbb + Z b)- 1 Zba (28a)
(e) n-port of admittance matrix Y terminated on Yb :
Ya= Yaa - Yab(Ybb + Y b)-lYba (28b)
Impedance transformations
28. When treating 2-ports whose elements are all of the same nature (all
resistances, or all inductances), it is convenient to use the notations of 1.65.
The impedance matrix is then written in the form
[ Z knZ] (29 )
knZ n2 Z
whereas the realization of Fig. 1.21 is redrawn in more general terms in
Fig. 28. If one attempts to realize as a T-structure a reciprocal 2-port of
impedance matrix
(30)
Impedance transformations 111
ln-------
1'"--------'
Fm. 4.28
a comparison of (30) and (5) gives the following elements values:

Za= Zn -Z12; (31)
When (30) is (29), the values (31) become
Zb = knZ; Za = (1 -kn)Z; Zc = n(n -k)Z (32)
but may, of course, be negative. In particular, fork= 1, the 2-port of Fig. 28
1n------
z
l'n....-_ ____,
FIG. 4.29
reduces to Fig. 29, whereas the T-network of elements (32) reduces to Fig. 30.
(1-n)Z n(n-l}Z
2
"----------..n2'
FIG. 4.30
I 12 4. Basic structures and transformations
This proves that the networks of Figs. 29 and 30 are equivalent for all values
ofn and Z.
29. Note that, for n -=;I= l, the impedances of the series branches in Fig. 30 are
of opposite signs, so one of them is negative. In spite of this, the above equiva-
lence (Norton's impedance transformation) may be of practical interest, for the
negative element can sometimes be cancelled with positive elements when
the equivalence is applied to a part of a larger network. For instance, for
n > l, one may add the positive impedance (n - l)Z in series with port l of
both 2-ports to obtain the equivalence between Figs. 31 and 32 where all
(n-1)2
1 2
z 1
I n
1' 2'
FIG. 4.31
n(n-1)2
1 2
nZ
,. 2'
FIG. 4.32
elements are positive. By closing port 2 on some impedance Z 1, one finally
obtains the equivalence of Figs. 33 and 34, holding for all n, Z, and Z1.
30. As the next example we consider a ladder 2-port of branches Za, Zb,
Zc, Za, Ze (Fig. 35 without the transformers and with y = l). Then, inserting
two transformers of ratio y, cancelling each other, on both sides of the central
branch Zc, whose impedance thus becomes y 2 Zc, one may apply Norton's
transformation to the two parts enclosed by dotted lines in Fig. 35. When the
1 1
(n-1)2
n(n-1)2
nZ
z z, z,
1' 1'
Fm. 4.33 FIG. 4.34
resulting impedances are computed and the adjacent series branches com-
bined, the resulting structure is again a pure ladder of elements Z~, Zf,,
Z~, Za, z; whose values are
Z~ = Za + (1 -y)Zb; z; = Zc + (1 -y)Za (33)

Z~ =y 2Zc +y(y - l)(Zb + Za)
lzb I l
I
I
1' 2'
----- ------
Fm. 4.35
This gives a whole class of equivalent 5-branch ladders 2 depending on one

arbitrary parameter y.
31. The 2-port of Fig. 30 cannot be transformed into a TI-structure, for the
element values are such that~ vanishes in (6). As a consequence, the 2-port
of Fig. 29 has no equivalent II representation. However, one may arrive at

a dual form of Norton's equivalence by taking the twisted duals of both
Figs. 29 and 30. Since duality changes n into -1/n for a transformer, twisted
duality produces 1/n. The resulting equivalence (where duality is taken
formally with respect to Z) is shown in Figs. 36 and 37.
z
1 2
I 1
1' 2'
FIG. 4.36
Zin
2
z z
1-n n(n-1)
1' 2'
FIG. 4.37
32. Our next example is the 2-port of Fig. 38. It admits an equivalent 2-port
of the type of Fig. 28, since the latter is canonic for all passive reciprocal
2-ports composed of one type of element only. If one port is short-circuited
in Fig. 38, the transformer brings the short circuit directly to the other port;
a similar effect in Fig. 28 is possible only if the series branch vanishes. The
canonic equivalent 2-port thus reduces to Fig. 29. The transformer ration is
necessarily the same in Figs. 38 and 29; this must be so, for Z' = Z = oo.
When the 2-port of Fig. 38 is opened at port 2, the voltage drop v1 - v2 =
v1 - nv 1 on Z' produces a current iz = ( I - n)v1/ Z' in this impedance, which
flows directly in the secondary of the transformer. The corresponding primary
current is niz, and the total input is thus i1 = (1 -n)iz = (1 - n) 2v1/Z'. Since
in Fig. 29, with port 2 open, one has i1 = v1/ Z, the 2-ports of Figs. 29 and 38
are equivalent for
Z=Z'(l -n)2 (34)
One proves, similarly, that the 2-ports of Figs. 39 and 36 are equivalent
for Z = (1 - n) 2 Z': when port 2 is shorted, the current i1 in the primary of
the transformer of Fig. 39 induces a current -ni1 in the secondary, thus
making a total iz = ( 1 - n)i1 in Z', and the potential of the central node is
z·
2
n
II
1' 2'
FIG. 4.38
v = (1 - n)Zi1; one then computes v1 from v1 - v2 = n(v2 - v), with v2 = 0

since port 2 is shorted, and one finds v1 = ( 1 - n)v = (1 - n) 2 i1Z'; on the
other hand, one has v1 = Zi1 in Fig. 36 with port 2 shorted.
FIG. 4.39
33. If an impedance -Z is connected in shunt at port I of the equivalent

2-ports of Figs. 29 and 30, the 2-port of Fig. 29 reduces to the ideal trans-
former of ratio 1/n, which is thus equivalent to the 2-port of Fig. 40. The last
network cannot be further simplified by~ - Y transformations, for its T-part
has zero impedance determinant and its II-part zero admittance determi-
nant. Note that the network of Fig. 40 is equivalent to an ideal tran.iformer as 2-port,
but not as 4-terminal network, for the 2-port of Fig. 40 is grounded, whereas
(1-n)Z n(n-1)2
2
l'o----------------(')2'
FIG. 4.40
there is no galvanic connection between ports in an ideal transformer. There

exists no simpler grounded 2-port equivalent circuit of an ideal transformer
than the one of Fig. 40, for a 3-terminal network with three branches is a
T- or TI-structure, and consequently has an impedance or admittance
matrix, whereas an ideal transformer has neither matrix. A dual equivalent
circuit (having also four branches) can be deduced from the dual Norton's
equivalence. Note, finally, that although the network of Fig. 40 is not realiz-
able in the field of real passive elements it is realizable in the field of complex
passive elements if Z is taken as the imaginary resistance jX. In particular,
a transformer effect can be produced at one particular real frequency by
means of inductances and capacitances.
34. By (28a), the 2-port of impedance matrix (30) terminated on Zb at
z z
FIG. 4.41
port 2 has the input impedance
z _z _ Z12Z21
(35)
a- ll Z22 + zb
For the 2-port of Fig. 41, (5) gives

Zn= Z22 =0; (36)
so that (35) reduces to
(37)
In particular, for Z = jX (this gives a passive lossless, but complex, 2-port),
(37) becomes
(38)
and the 2-port transforms an impedance into its dual, in particular an in-
ductance into a capacitance, or conversely. For this reason, the 2-port of
Fig. 41 is called a dualizer. This shows that either inductances or capacitances be-
come redundant in the list of basic elements, when imaginary resistances are accepted.
On the other hand, if one sets Z = R in (37) and Zb = 1/Cp, one obtains
Za = -R 2Cp, thus a negative inductance. This shows that, if negative resis-
tances are accepted, it is not necessary to consider negative inductances, nor capacitances.
Note that the 2-port of Fig. 41 accepts an equivalent TI-form.
35. From (36), the lattice impedances (18) of the dualizer are Z1 = -Z,
Z2 = Z. In contrast with the grounded realization of Fig. 41, however, the
lattice realization affords a perfect galvanic isolation between its ports: if the
terminals 1 l' of the lattice are short-circuited, and if the terminals 2 2' are
also, the impedance between ( 1 l ') and (2 2') is infinite, since it is the
parallel combination of Z/2 and -Z/2.
36. If two dualizers (even based on different values of Z) are cascaded, the
total 2-port transforms an impedance into the dual of its dual, that is, into
itself, within a constant factor. It is to be expected, therefore, that such a
2-port is equivalent to an ideal transformer. This is easily checked on Fig. 42
z , - - _ n z - - 7 -nZ
10-----1
-z -z nZ
1'0-------t--..,___ ____.__--l-----~2·
L ___ _
Fm. 4.42
which consists of the TI-equivalent of the 2-port of Fig. 41 followed by the

2-port of Fig. 41 in its original T-form, but with Z replaced by -nZ. If a
~-Y transformation is applied to the part of Fig. 41 enclosed in dotted
lines, the structure of Fig. 40 results, which was proved equivalent to an
ideal transformer of ratio 1/n. In 33, where this equivalence was established,
it was noted that the 2-port of Fig. 40 did not isolate the ports from each
other. An isolation is, however, produced if the T-network on the left of
Fig. 42 is replaced by its equivalent lattice, to yield the 2-port of Fig. 43.
FIG. 4.43
Finally a Y-~ transformation suppressing node A of Fig. 43 reduces the net-

work to Fig. 44. Consequently, Fig. 44 is equivalent to an ideal transformer of
z -nZ
2
Z/n
FIG. 4.44
ratio I /n, including its isolating property3; in other words, we have obtained a
true equivalence between 4-terminal subnetworks. Since Fig. 44 is realizable
in the field of passive (but not real) elements by setting Z = jX, it appears
that the ideal transformer becomes redundant in the list of basic passive reciprocal
elements, if imaginary resistances are accepted. The 2-port of Fig. 44 contains seven
branches; by enumerating all possible 4-terminal structures with six or less
branches, one can prove, however, that no simpler equivalent circuit exists
for an ideal transformer.
37. In a certain sense the dualizer of Fig. 41 and the gyrator behave similarly,
since both 2-ports transform an impedance into its dual. The 2-ports are,
however, not equivalent, for one is reciprocal and the other is not. By cascad-
ing a dualizer with a gyrator (Fig. 45), one again obtains a 2-port transform-
z z
--~2
R
1'u---------- ---u2'
FIG. 4.45
ing an impedance into itself, within a constant factor. The 2-port of Fig. 45
is, however, nonreciprocal and cannot be equivalent to an ideal transformer;
its properties will now be investigated. The chain matrix of the dualizer of
Fig. 41 is deduced by (21) from its impedance matrix (36) and is
[ -~/Z ~]
The chain matrix of the gyrator is similarly deduced from its impedance
matrix (2.30) and is
The chain matrix of the cascade combination is the product
With the notation n = R/Z, it is similar to chain matrix (24) of an ideal

transformer, except for a sign reversal in one entry. The equations of the
2-port of Fig. 45 are thus
(39)
When terminated on an impedance Zb, the 2-port produces an input im-
pedance Za = -Zb/n 2 by (39) and thus behaves as a negative impedance
converter if n is real, that is, if Z is a resistance. Note that the realization of
Fig. 45 is not passive in that case.
38. On the other hand, for Z = jX, the structure of Fig. 45 is passive but
complex; since n becomes purely imaginary, -n 2 is positive, and no negative
impedance conversion occurs. When n is purely imaginary, it can be replaced
by -n* in one of the equations (39), and these become
(40)
It is convenient to define an ideal tran.iformer 2-port of complex ratio n by Eqs.
(40), since they reduce to ( 1.13) and ( 1. 15) for n real. When n is purely
imaginary, the passive realization of Fig. 45 with Z = R/n involving a gyrator
and imaginary resistances is available. Finally, a complex ratio n can be
obtained from its real and imaginary parts by parallel-connecting the inputs
and series-connecting the outputs. It is also easily checked that Eqs. (40)
abstractly define a passive (but not real, nor reciprocal) 2-port. Although
the complex ideal transformer is not a new element, since its realization has
just been described, it is a useful theoretical concept for most of the proper-
ties if real transformers are easily extended to complex transformers.
39. Similarly, a complex tran.iformer n-port is defined by

ia +Nib= O; (41)
which extend (1.27) and (1.30) to complex ratio matrices. Note that N' of
(1.30) has been replaced by its conjugate N'* =Nin the voltage equation
(41), as was the case for the scalar n in (40) compared to ( 1.13). A trans-
former n-port of complex ratio matrix is immediately realizable as a series-
parallel combination of complex transformer 2-ports whose ratios are the
entries nii of the matrix N; this was done in 1.26 for real transformer n-ports.
Finally, the congruence transformations of 8 are applicable, provided N' is
replaced by N everywhere, while N is not altered, and consequently they
become conjunctive transformations. By analogy with the real case, N is the
ratio matrix of the complex transformer n-port and M = [ l 2, NJ is its current-
constraint matrix. As in 1.28, it can be replaced by TM, with T arbitrary
nonsingular; but T may now be complex. 4
Networks without transformers

40. The synthesis of real passive reciprocal constant n-ports of prescribed
impedance matrix R or admittance matrix G produced in 9 generally leads
to realizations containing ideal transformers in addition to positive resistances.
We now wish to discuss the necessary and sufficient conditions for obtaining
realizations with positive resistances only. 5 These are not known in general,
and only some elementary partial results will be described in 41-47. Some
properties of general networks without transformers are discussed in 48-50.
Networks without transformers 121
41. Consider a grounded resistance r-port of admittance matrix G. By 12, Gii is

the negative sum of the positive conductances joining nodes i and j and is
thus nonpositive. On the other hand,
(42)
is the sum of the conductances joining node i to all other nodes except the
ground. Since Gii is the sum of all conductances meeting node i, the difference
between Gii and (42) is the sum of the conductances directly joining node i
and the ground, and is, therefore, nonnegative. We have thus proved the
inequality
r
cii -I
j~l
IGijl ~o (43)
j ici
A real symmetric matrix satisfying (43) for all i is called dominant. A dominant
matrix satisfying Gij < 0 for all i-# j is called superdominant. We have thus
proved that the admittance matrix of a grounded resistance n-port is super-
dominant. Conversely, a prescribed superdominant matrix can be realized
as the admittance matrix of a grounded n-port of positive resistances: the
entries -Gij immediately determine the conductances of the branches to be
connected between nodes i andj, whereas the conductances to ground result
from the differences (43). Combining both results: a matrix is the admittance
matrix of a grounded resistance n-port if! it is superdominant.
42. Note that, if the polarity of some port is reversed, the corresponding row
and column of the admittance matrix are multiplied by -1 and the resulting
matrix is no longer superdominant, but it remains dominant (hence the
interest of this weaker concept). Note, however, that not every dominant
matrix can be made superdominant by symmetric sign changes of rows and
columns: this is obviously impossible for a matrix of order 3 with all positive
off-diagonal elements.
43. A prescribed dominant matrix can be realized as the admittance matrix of a

balanced n-port ,if positive resistances. A dominant matrix is the sum of partial
matrices of the form
(44)
completed by zeros everywhere else, for all combinations i cfa j for which
Gij cfa 0, and of a diagonal matrix of dimension n whose entries are the first
members of (43). A partial matrix (44) is realized as Fig. IO with Z2 replaced
by -l/2Gij for Gii < 0 [since (44) then reduces to (15)], and as Fig. l l with
Z1 replaced by I /2Gii for Gij > 0. Finally, the diagonal matrix corresponds
to n separate shunt admittances at the individual ports, which are non-
negative by (43).
44. From the realizations of 43 and 41, it is clear that a dominant (and, a
fortiori, a superdominant) matrix is positive definite. The results of 41 and 43
are oflittle use for the synthesis of resistance n-ports with prescribed impedance
matrices: even if R is nonsingular, we cannot base the synthesis on G = R- 1 ,
since the inverse of a dominant matrix is not necessarily dominant; duality
arguments also fail, since the realizations of 41 and 43 are generally non-
planar.
45. If an n-port has an impedance matrix, its ports form a cotree in the enlarged
network (including the port branches) since only then can the port currents
be chosen as independent variables in the n-port impedance equations v = Zi.
Dually, if an n-port has an admittance matrix, its ports form a tree in the enlarged
network. Finally, if a resistance n-port is at all realizable, it is realizable as a graph
having 2n nodes at most: the terminals of the n ports form a set of 2n nodes at
most (they are not necessarily distinct), and any additional purely internal
node can be eliminated by the Y-/J.. transformation of 15. Consequently, the
synthesis of a resistance n-port of prescribed impedance matrix can be based
on the solution of (2) in terms of positive branch impedances and of a topo-
logical (hence totally unimodular) path-set matrix. Similarly, the synthesis
of a prescribed admittance matrix can be based on (3).
46. Both (2) and (3) are of the form M = T '!J.. T, with !J.. positive diagonal
and T totally unimodular. We now prove that any matrix M of the above
form is paramount, which means that every principal minor of M is larger
than the modulus of any other minor based on the same rows. By the Binet-
Cauchy theorem, a minor of dimension k of M is a sum of the form Lai !J..i bi
where at , !J..i and ht represent corresponding minors of T ', !J.. and T, re-
spectively. All /J..t are nonnegative, and all at and bi are ± I or 0. For a
principal minor, one has at= ht, and the sum reduces to a selected sum of
certain /J..t. For a nonprincipal minor based on the same rows, the ai and /J..t
are the same as in the first sum, so that the minor expansion contains the
same /J..t as in the principal minor expansion, but with the possibility of -1
or 0 coefficients. Consequently, the modulus of the second sum cannot exceed
the first sum (which is nonnegative).
47. We have thus found a necessary condition for the realizability of resistance
n-ports of prescribed R or G matrix: the matrix must be paramount. We also
Networks without transformers 123
have now a sufficient (hence certainly not weaker) condition for a G matrix
(dominance). Consequently, a dominant matrix is paramount. For the dimension
n = 2, dominance and paramount character are equivalent, for they require
only that
(45)
We will now show that conditions (45) are also sufficient for the synthesis of a
resistance 2-port. For R12 > 0 satisfying (45), the element values (31) of the
equivalent T-structure are positive. For R12 < 0, a polarity reversal at one
port produces R 12 > 0, hence the first case. Similar conditions apply to the
admittance case by working on the IT-structure.
48. Let us evaluate the impedance seen between terminals 1 and 2 of a

grounded 2-port. Since the one-port of terminals 1, 2 results from a series-
opposing connection of the ports of the 2-port (compare with 1.19), this
impedance is Zn + Z22 - 2Z12, by analogy with ( 1.11). Consider now an
n-terminal subnetwork and denote by Zpq the impedance seen between ter-
minals p and q, and by Zps,qq the transfer impedance between terminal
pairs pq and sq (where q is the common node). By the previous rule, one has
Zps = Zqp + Zsq - 2Zps,qq
Hence (Campbell's formula)
Zps,qq = (Zpq + Zsq - Zps) /2 (46)
and all transfer impedances are determined by direct impedance measure-
ments.
49. We now discuss the topological loop analysis of a network without trans-
formers. Let ei be the algebraic sum of the voltage generators in series in
loop i and form the q-vector e of entries ei . Let Z be the diagonal matrix of
the branch impedances. Owing to the generators, the homogeneous loop
voltage equations (1.30) are replaced bye= N'va - Vb or, using (1.31),
e = [N', -Iq]v = Kv
On the other hand, one has v = -Zi and, using (1.27),
· lia] = l-NJ · = -
l= ib iq lb K''lb
By elimination of i and v, the network equations

e = KZK'ib (47)
are obtained.
50. The solution of (4 7) involves the computation of the determinant ~ of

A = KZK' and of the minors of dimension q - 1 of A. Since K is totally
unimodular and Z diagonal, the Binet-Cauchy theorem expresses ~ as the
sum of products of entries of Z, ea!2h product corresponding to a nonzero
minor of dimension q of K. By 1.50, the nonzero minors of the current-
constraint matrix M correspond to complete trees and, dually, the nonzero
minors of the voltage-constraint matrix K correspond to cotrees. The product
of the impedances of all branches of a co tree is called a co tree product. Finally,
~ is the sum ef all the cotree products of the network.
Consider now a principal minor of dimension q - 1 of~, say ~11- It is
deduced from ~ by the suppression of row 1 of Kand of column 1 of K',
that is, by opening link 1 in the network. Hence, ~11 is the sum of all the
cotree products of the network N1 deduced from the original network N by
opening link 1. Let C be one of the cotrees of N1. Its complement in N1 is a
tree, but its complement D in N is that tree completed by link 1 and thus
contains one loop using link 1.
Consider now a nonprincipal minor ~12. Since one has to suppress row 1
of Kand column 2 of K', one has to consider the subnetworks N 1 and N2
deduced from N by opening link 1 and link 2, respectively. A contribution
to ~12 is only produced by the minors of Kand K' which are simultaneously
nonzero, but they may be of identical or different signs. The minors are simul-
taneously nonzero if the selected branches in the diagonal matrix Z form a
cotree C both in N 1 and in N2. Consider now the complement D of C in N.
By the last remark of the previous paragraph, used twice, D contains a loop
using both link 1 and link 2. The cotree product corresponding to C is to be
taken as positive or negative in the sum ~12, depending on whether the links
1 and 2 have identical or opposite directions in the loop contained in D.
Howitt transformations
51. Consider a concrete n-port having an admittance matrix Ya and assume
that the n-port is in standard form consisting of a transformer k-port of
current-constraint matrix M whose first n ports are free and whose last k - n
ports are terminated on various elements forming a (k - n )-port of admit-
tance matrix Ye. Partition M into
(n) (k -n)
M= [Ma, Mb] (48)
and let r = rank M. Since the n-port is assumed to have an admittance

matrix, the port voltages are independent variables in the admittance equa-
tion ia = Ya Va. This requires the columns of Ma to be linearly independent,
Howitt transformations 125
hence rank Ma= n:::;; r. The matrix (48) can then be transformed into an
equivalent form
(n)
M= [l; (n)
(r -n)
(49)
One may further consider that the transformer k-port of current-constraint

+
matrix (49) originates from a transformer (k r - n)-port of constraint
matrix
(n)
(50)
(r -n)
in which the r - n additional ports are left open. Let us consider the enlarged
+
r-port formed by the (k r - n)-port of matrix (50) whose k - n ports cor-
responding to the columns of
(51)
are terminated on the elements of admittance matrix Ye. Since (50) 1s m

normal form (it contains a unit matrix lr), its ratio matrix is (51), and by
the second theorem 8, the admittance matrix of the enlarged r-port is
(52)
The original n-port of admittance matrix Ya is the enlarged r-port of
matrix (52) whose last r - n ports are left open, and it is computed by (28b)
where Yb= 0, hence
(53)
52. Matrix (49) has the form 6 ofa Howitt matrix (A.l 1). Ifit is premultiplied
by a similar nonsingular matrix of dimension r, say,
(r -n)
p] (n) (54)
Q (r -n)
the transformer k-port remains equivalent to itself and the form of (41) is not
altered. The submatrix (51) is then changed into UMb and, consequently,
(52) into
UYU' (55)
but, since the n-port equivalence is preserved, (53) is not altered., as can
easily be verified. In any case, we have proved that the r-ports of admittance
matrices Y and (55) yield equivalent n-ports when their last r - n ports are open,
provided U of (55) is a Howitt matrix of the type (54).
53. Consider, in particular, a Kirchhoff n-port where the R, L, C elements

have unit values. Set
(56)
where the columns corresponding to the ports of the transformer k-port have
been distributed among three submatrices corresponding to the three kinds
of elements. With
(57)
matrix (52) is
Y= G+pC+p-1s (58)
with
C=McMb; (59)
The Howitt transformation by U changes (58) into a similar expression
where G, C and Sare replaced by UGU', UCU' and USU', respectively.
54. In the dual version of the above theorem, we consider the voltage-con-
straint matrix K of the transformer k-port and assume that the n-port has
an impedance matrix Za. This requires the columns of Ka to be linearly
independent, and K takes a form similar to (49). In the enlarged subnetwork
whose voltage-constraint matrix is similar to (50), the additional ports must
now be short-circuited, and (28b) is replaced by (28a), whereas (52) is re-
placed by an expression of the type
(60)
owing to the first theorem 8, and the Howitt transformation changes this
into
U'ZU (61)
The dual of theorem 52 is then: the r-ports of impedance matrices Zand (61)
yi,eld equivalent n-ports when their last r - n ports are shorted, provided U of (61) is a
Howitt matrix of the type (54).
The degree of a Kirchhoff network

55. In 2.5, the degree of a Kirchhoff network was defined as the degree of its
determinant or as the number of independent state variables, but we now
wish to compute this number explicitly from the network structure in
standard form, without generators. The current-constraint matrix M ofrank
The degree of a Kirchhoff network 127
r is partitioned as in (56), andµ, (::;:r) denotes rank Mc. Simultaneously, we

consider the voltage-constraint matrix Kand partition it similarly; moreover,
we denote by p the rank of the submatrix KL corresponding to ports closed on
unit inductances. We will prove 7 that the degree of the network is µ, + p, but
first will give a physical interpretation of these numbers. The submatrix Mc,
and the associated constraint equation Mc ic = 0 (where ic is the vector of
capacitance currents) is deduced from Mi= 0 by equating to zero all cur-
rents other than ic, that is, by opening all L and R elements. Dually,
KL VL = 0 (where VL is the vector of inductance voltages) is deduced from
Kv = 0 by short-circuiting all C and R elements.
56. The degree, or the number of independent state variables, is the number
of linearly independent entries in the set (vc, iL)- The proof of the announced
theorem consists in three steps showing successively that (a) the sets vc and
iL are mutually independent; (b) the number of linearly independent capa-
citance voltages isµ, (the rank of Mc); and (c) the number of linearly in-
dependent inductance currents is p (the rank of KL)- The proof of (c) is
immediately deduced from (b) by duality and will be omitted.
Specifying initial values for vc and h is equivalent to replacing the
actual reactive elements by voltage and current generators. With this sub-
stitution, the network becomes a constant passive reciprocal n-port (composed
ofresistances and transformers) closed on generators. Part (a) of the theorem
is then equivalent to the following statement: the voltage at some port of a
constant passive reciprocal n-port cannot be a linear combination of the cur-
rents at some other ports. This is trivial, for a relation of the assumed form
would be, for instance,
v1 = R12 i2 + R13 is + · ··
which is impossible, for passivity and reciprocity impose R 1 j = 0 for allj, if
Rn = 0, by A.40.
When discussing the number of linearly independent voltages vc, one
may put iL = 0, for the treatments of vc and iL are independent, by the
superposition theorem combined with part (a). This open-circuits all in-
ductances, and reduces the relevant constraints to the submatrix
(62)
When analyzing the network reduced to the transformer (62) with its RC
terminations, one may bring Mc of (62) in its normal form
Mc=[~ ~l (63)
where pis rank Mc. To find the equations of the network, we border (62)
by a unit matrix to form an r-port, and will ultimately leave its ports open
to yield the original network. By analogy with (58), the admittance matrix
+
of the r-port is G pC with expressions (59) of G and C. The voltage vector
u at the ports is the vector of the voltages per turn in the transformer (62),
and the vector vc of the capacitance voltages is given by one of the submatrix
equations of ( 1.20), that is,
Vc=Mcu (64)
With the form (63) of Mc and a partition of u into subvectors Ua, up, this
becomes
Ve=[}, (65)
so the number of independent voltages vc is the number of independent ua.

On the other hand, the open-circuit equations of the n-port are
(G+pC)u = 0 (66)
By (59), and with the form (63) of Mc, one has
(67)
with Caoc = IP+ NN' > 0. The partitioned equation (66) is thus of the form
(68)
By a congruence transformation which does not change ua, one may reduce
Gpp to the direct sum of a unit matrix and a zero matrix. Since G > 0, the
entries of Gap and Gpa corresponding to the zero matrix of Gpp are then zero
by A.40. Again, by a congruence transformation which does not change ua
(subtracting multiples of Gpp from Gap and Gpa), one reduces Gap and Gpa
to zero. Finally, Ua is isolated in the top matrix equation of (68) which is of
+
the form (r p!1)ua = 0 with 11 > 0. Rewriting this as (A - plp)u~ = 0 with
A= -/1- 1! 2 r/1- 112 , one obtains ua as an arbitrary linear combination of the
eigenvectors of A. By A.59, A is nondefective and has p independent eigen-
vectors and the theorem is proved.
57. Passivity and reciprocity occur several times in the above proof and are
essential as can be shown by counterexamples. First, an inductance seen
through an ideal gyrator appears as a capacitance, and can thus be combined
with another capacitance at the gyrator input; the result is a network of
degree 1, although it contains two reactive elements. Reductions of degree
in active networks occur in a number of ways: positive and negative elements
may cancel each other by series and parallel connections, which brings a
The degree of a Kirchhoff network 129
reduction of degree from 2 to O (while the reduction with positive elements is

from 2 to 1). Norton's transformation can replace a set of positive and nega-
tive elements by an ideal transformer; a positive capacitance becomes a
negative inductance when seen through a suitable resistive 2-port (containing
negative resistances) and may cancel with a negative inductance, and so
forth.
58. Theorem 55 can be stated in various alternative forms by using the

following purely algebraic property: let M and K be orthogonal matrices
(MK'= 0); for any conformal partition M = [Ma, Mp] and K =[Ka, Kp], one
has
rank M = rank Ma+ nullity Kp = nullity K (69)
Let us first remark that if two matrices are orthogonal, the rank of the first
matrix is the nullity of the second one; this results from the normal forms
of Kand Min 1.29-30. Now, Kp is the voltage-constraint matrix of the sub-
network deduced from the transformer n-port of voltage-constraint matrix
K by short-circuiting the ports of subscript a. Relation (69) will be proved
by computing the corresponding current-constraint matrix (to be denoted
My) and by applying the first remark which gives nullity Kp = rank My.
Let r and ra be the ranks of Mand Ma; ainong the r relations Mi= 0,
written Maia+ Mp ip = 0, a number ra ofrelations is consumed in eliminat-
ing ia to yield a system My ip = 0 of rank r - ra. One thus has rank Ma+
nullity Kp = rank Ma+ rank My= r.
59. As a consequence of 58, the degree can be expressed in terms of invariants

of Malone. Since the submatrix (62) of Mis complementary to KL, one has
rank M = rank MRc - rank KL+ number of inductances (70)
The elimination ofrank KL from the original statement of the theorem yields
degree= rank Mc+ rank MRc -rank M + number of inductances
(71)
60. We now deduce explicitly the network determinant from the network
equations in polynomial form. With r denoting the rank of M, the network
can be considered as the RC r-port of 56 terminated on an L r-port formed
by the transformer of submatrix ML closed on unit inductances. The equation
of the RC r-port is
+
i = (G pC)u
The relations of the L r-port are
M'r,u = VL = -PiL
MLiL = i
Since VL is thus eliminated, the remaining equations are combined into

-Ir
-Ir
0
iL] [i]
pl;. ZL
=0 (72)
where A is the number of inductances. The network determinant ~ is the

determinant of the polynomial matrix of (72). With the notation S defined
in (59), one has the identity
lf
-Plr
-Plr
0
ML][G+PC
ML
l;.
0
Mi
-lr
-lr
0
ML
0
pl;.
l
~ r+~+cP'
Mi
0
Plr
0 }J
where two of the matrices are triangular. Equating the determinants gives
(within a numerical coefficient)
~ = p;.-r det (S +Gp+ Cp2) (73)
Since the degree of~ is (71), we obtain by difference
deg det (S +Gp+ Cp 2) = rank Mc+ rank MRc (74)
61. The computation of the degree of a real passive nonreciprocal network

is quite easy if it is assumed that the network contains no inductances, which
is legitimate since they can be replaced by capacitances and gyrators. The
network is then a constant n-port closed on n capacitances, and its degree is
the number of independent capacitance voltages. If capacitances are dis-
connected, the degree is simply the maximum number m of ports of the
n-port whose voltages can be independently specified; if Av = Bi is the equa-
tion of the n-port, the degree is thus the rank of B.
chapter 5
Synthesis of passive one-ports
Introduction
1. We now consider the synthesis of well-defined passive one-ports of pre-
scribed impedance or admittance, given as a rational function of p. We use
the word immittance to cover both cases. By 3.18, the immittance Z(p) is a
positive function, that is, such that Re Z(p) > 0 for Rep> 0. For a real one-
port, the immittance is a positive realfunction (or Brune function), that is, a
positive function with real coefficients. For a lossless one-port, (3.19) reduces
to
(1)
that is, to Z(p)+ Z( -p) = 0 for a lossless real one-port. As a consequence,

the immittance of a real lossless one-port is an odd positive real function (Foster
function). A function satisfying (I) is called para-odd.
2. In this chapter we obtain concrete realizations for arbitrary prescribed

immittances of the various types just mentioned. In each case we use only
such building elements as are strictly necessary to make the synthesis at all
possible. Since every well-defined one-port is abstractly reciprocal, gyrators
are always exduded. Imaginary resistances are only accepted in the synthesis
of nonreal functions, and real resistances are excluded in lossless one-ports.
Since the synthesis starts from the immittance, assumed irreducible (without
common factors in the numerator and denominator), we accept weak
equivalence. Moreover, we attempt to obtain completely controllable and
completely observable realizations.
131
132 5. Synthesis of passive one-ports
3. A number of classical properties of rational functions are quoted here for

convenient reference. They are presented in a way which makes easy a later
extension to rational matrices.
(a) A rational function has a pole of order k at Po cf- oo if
lim (P-Po)kZ(p) P=Po (2)
exists and is nonzero. For k = l, the pole p 0 is simple and (2) is the residue
of the function at Po. For a pole at infinity, the same definitions apply, but
(2) is replaced by
limp-kZ(p) P= oo
(b) Let the polesPi,h, ... of Z(p) have orders k1, k2, ... (including a
possible pole of order koo at infinity). The partial fraction expansion of Z(p) is
Z(p) = Zoo(P) + Li (p Zt(P)

-Pt)k,
(3)
where Zt(P) is a polynomial of degree kt - l at most, and where Z 00 (p) is a

polynomial of degree k00 • Each term of (3) has only one pole (at Pt or infinity)
and is called a unipolar component of Z(p). For a simple pole at Pt, Zt (p) is a
constant equal to the residue at Pt.
(c) The degree of an irreducible rational function is the degree of its
numerator or denominator, whichever is the larger.
(d) The degree of the sum of two rational functions without common
poles (including those at infinity) is the sum of their degrees. In particular,
the degree m of (3) is the sum of the degrees of the unipolar components,
that is,
(4)
4. The degree of a one-port is, by definition, the degree of its immittance. The
immittance of a one-port of degree m has at most m +
I coefficients in the
numerator and at most m +
I in the denominator, but one coefficient can be
normalized to unity by dividing numerator and denominator. Thus, the
maximum number of parameters of a one-port of degree m is 2m +
I. Consider the
network formed by terminating the one-port on a positive resistance R.
With Z = B/A, the equation of the one-port, reinterpreted as differential
equation, is Av = Bi, and the determinant of the system formed by this
equation and the terminating condition v = -Ri is AR+ B, a polynomial
without zeros in Rep > 0 in virtue of lemma 3.31. The polynomial thus has
degree m; a smaller degree would mean that certain zeros have become
infinite which is forbidden since p = oo is a point of the imaginary axis
Rep= 0. Consequently, the network formed by Zand R contains at least m
reactive elements by 2.5, so any realization of a one-port of degree m contains at
least m reactive elements.
Properties of positive functions 133
5. In the case of a real one-port of degree m, all 2m + I parameters are real,

and so are the m reactive elements. By difference there remains m + I fre-
quency-independent elements (resistances and ideal transformers). For a
complex one-port, the 2m + I complex parameters correspond to 2 (2m + I)
real parameters. Subtracting the m real reactive elements, there remain
3m + 2 frequency-independent elements (imaginary resistances now being
accepted). For lossless one-ports, condition (1), written BA*= AB* forces
A*= ±A, B* = =i= B, since A and B are coprime and since the leading
coefficient in either A or B can be normalized to unity. These conditions
force the coefficients of A to be alternatively real and imaginary, and con-
versely for B. If both A and Bare of degree m, the number of real parameters
per polynomial is m + I, and the total number of real parameters of a lossless
one-port is 2m + 1, for one coefficient may be normalized to unity. Since
m(real) reactive elements are required, there remain m + I frequency- inde-
pendent elements. For real lossless one-ports, the imaginary coefficients of A
and B reduce to zero, so one polynomial is even and the other odd. The sum
A + B is, then, simply a general polynomial of degree m with unit leading
coefficient, and the total number of parameters is m, so that no frequency
independent elements are needed. The following table summarizes the mini-
mum number ef elements required to synthesize one-ports ef degree m ef various classes:
L andC Other elements Total
general m 3m+2 2(2m+I)
real m m+I 2m+ I
lossless m m+I 2m+ 1
real lossless m 0 m
For functions of degree zero, the above results give, respectively, 2, 1, I,
and 0, and the corresponding immittances are of the form R + jX, R, jX,
and 0, so the synthesis is trivial.
Properties of positive functions

6. (a) The sum ef two positive (real, para-odd)functions is a positive (real, para-odd)
function.
(b) IJZ(p) is a positive (real, para-odd)function, so is I/Z(p), for Re 1/Z
= (Re Z)/Z2 , and 1/Z + 1/Z* vanishes with Z + Z*.
1. A positive function, other than the constant 0, has no zeros in Rep > 0. If it has
a.finite zero on the imaginary axis, the zero is simple, and the derivative at this zero is
real and positive. In the neighborhood of a zero p0 of order k, the function
is of the form
Z(p) = A(p -Po)k
where
A= [dkZ/dpk]p 0
With the polar representation
p -Po= reiB; B>0
one has
Re Z(p) = Brk cos (kB+</,) (5)
For Re Po> 0, (5) must be nonnegative for all 0, which is impossible. For
Re Po= 0, (5) must be nonnegative for -Tr/2 ~ 0 ~ Tr/2; this is possible
only fork= 1, ef, = 0. The last condition proves that A= [dZ/dp]p is real
and positive. In particular, if a positive function has a simple zero at p = 0,
the function is of the form Ap in the neighborhood of this point.
8. Consider now the case where a positive function vanishes for p = oo.
Since the transformation q = 1/p changes the half-plane Rep~ 0 into the
half-plane Re q ~ 0, the function is a positive function of q and vanishes for
q = 0; it is thus of the form Aq = A/p with A real and positive. The function
1/ Z near p = oo is A- 1p, and the residue A- 1 of 1/ Z at infinity is real positive
with A. Hence, if a positive function Z has a zero at infinity, this zero is simple
and the residue at i'!finity ef z- 1 is real positive.
9. By applying theorem 7 to Y = l / Z, one proves that a positive function has

no poles in Rep > 0; if it has a pole on the imaginary axis, the pole is simple and
its residue is real positive. By applying theorem 8 to Y = 1/ Z, the last result is
extended to the pole at infinity. As a corollary, the degrees of the numerator
and ef the denominator of a positive function differ at most by one unit, that is, the
function and its inverse have at most a simple pole at infinity.
10. By 9, a positive function is analytic in Rep > 0. A weak converse of this

theorem is: if Z(p) is analytic in Rep> 0, and if Re Z > 0 on the imaginary
axis, Z(p) is a positive function. The theorem is a direct consequence of B.2.
11. Letjwt be the simple poles on the imaginary axis of the positive function
Z(p); the function may, in addition, have a simple pole at infinity. Denote
by ht and h00 the corresponding residues and subtract from Z(p) its unipolar
components at all the poles; the difference
ht
Z1(P) = Z(p) - I- .
P-JWt
- -hoop (6)
is analytic in Rep > 0. Since all ht are real, the subtracted terms are purely
imaginary on Rep = 0, and one has Re Z1 = Re Z ~ 0 for Rep = 0. By 10,
(6) is then a positive function. On the other hand, it is easily checked that
Properties of positive functions 135
every term subtracted in (6) is para-odd, and if Z is para-odd, so is Z1.

Finally, for a real function Z, the imaginary poles occur in conjugate pairs
±jwi with conjugate residues, and the residues are identical since they are
real. Combining the conjugate contributions
hi hi 2hi p
--.-+--.-= 2 2 (7)
p - JWi p + JWi p + Wi
one obtains a real function; since the terms hooP and ho/P (corresponding to
an isolated pole at zero) are also real functions, Z1 remains real with Z.
To conclude, we have proved that a positive (real, para-odd) function remains
positive (real, para-odd) after extraction of all its poles on the imaginary axis. More-
over, by 3(d), the degree of Z1 in (6) is the degree of Z diminished by the
number of extracted poles.
12. It is easily checked that hd(P - jwi) is a positive function, so some of the
extracted terms can be reinserted, and the result is still a positive function
by 6(a). Consequently, theorem 11 remains true if a total extraction of all
poles is replaced by a partial extraction (with only a part of the residue) of
some poles. The decrease of degree is then the number of totally extracted
poles.
13. All the poles (and zeros) of a positive para-odd function are concentrated on the
imaginary axis. By (I) a pole at p 0 of Z (necessarily in Rep> 0) must coincide
with a pole at p 0 of Z*, thus with a pole at -Pt of Z which falls in Rep ~ 0,
and this is impossible unless Re p0 = 0. If all poles are extracted by (6), Z
reduces to a para-odd function of degree zero, thus to an imaginary constant.
This means that every positive para-odd function is of the form
n h·
Z(P)=jXo+ L _i_-+hooP (8)
i~1P-JWi
with hi > 0, hoo 2 0.
14. In the case of a real odd function, jX0 must be zero; using the combina-
tion (7), with the notation ht replacing 2hi, and writing explicitly the term
ho/P, one obtains Foster's reactance theorem: every Foster function is of the form
h n hp
Z(p)=....2+ L 2 i 2+hoop (9)
P i~IP wi +
with hi > 0, ho, hoo 2 0.
15. Let Ro be the minimum of Re Z in Rep > 0. Since Z is analytic in

Rep> 0, this minimum is reached (at one or several points) only on the
imaginary axis, unless Z is constant. In any case, Z - Ro is a positive (real)

function with Z, if Ro is the minimum of Re Z on the j-axis. More generally,
Z1 = Z - Zo is a positive function with Z, if the finite constant Zo is such that
Re Z1 > 0 on the j-axis.
16. Let jwo be one of the points where Re Z reaches its minimum Ro, and
let Z(jwo) = Zo =Ro+ jXo. The function Z - Zo is also positive (but
generally not real) with Z, provided Xo #- oo, that is, ifjw 0 is not a pole of Z.
Since Z - Zo vanishes at jwo, its reciprocal has a pole at this point, which
can be extracted by writing
l ho l
-Z-(p-)---Z-o = p---jw-o + -Z1-(P-)
where Z1(P) is again a positive function whose degree has decreased by one
unit compared with Z(p), owing to 12. Combining the results, one has
Z(p) =Ro+ jXo +-

ho
- - -l - (10)
p -jwo + Z1(P)
and the process can be iterated on Z1 yielding a continuedfraction. In the case
Xo = oo, the unipolar component at jwo can first be extracted from Z(p),
and the above process is applied to the remainder. In any case, a positive
function admits a continued fraction expansion where every term is a positive function
of degree zero or one.
Lossless one-ports
17. Every term of (8) or (9) is the impedance of a simple one-port, and the
sum is thus realized as the impedance of a series connection of simple one-
ports. The functions hoop and ho/P are the impedances of a positive inductance
hoo and of a positive capacitance l /ho, respectively. The admittance
(p - jwi)hi is the sum of the admittance p/hi of a positive capacitance 1/hi,
and of an imaginary conductance -jwi/hi whose inverse is the imaginary
resistancejhi/Wi, so hd(P - jwi) is the impedance of the parallel combination
of a capacitance l /hi with an imaginary resistance jht/wi. Similarly, one has
(p 2 + w7)/hi p = p/hi + w7/hip, so the inverse impedance is realized as an
antiresonant circuit of inductance hi/w7 in parallel with a capacitance l /hi.
The synthesis is thus achieved by Fig. l for complex lossless one-ports and
by Fig. 2 for real lossless one-ports.
18. In the case of Fig. l, and if h00 = 0, the degree mis the number n of terms
contained in the sum (8), and the number of elements of Fig. l agrees with
the values announced in the table of 5. The case hoo #- 0 is special, for the
Lossless one-ports 137
1/hn
jXo
1'
Fm. 5.1
specification of a pole at infinity requires one parameter less than the speci-
fication of a finite pole (at}wi), but the number of imaginary resistances in
the realization is also smaller by one unit than the general value. For real
lossless one-ports, the number ofreactive elements in the realization according
to Fig. 2 is always m (in accordance with 5), and there are no frequency-
independent elements: every term of the sum (9) is of degree 1 or 2 and
requires one or two reactive elements, respectively. This is summarized by
stating that the realization of Fig. 1 (Fig. 2) is canonic for lossless (real lossless)
one-ports. Both realizations are simply the physical interpretation of the
expansion into partial fractions, for. each antiresonant circuit of Fig. 2
results from the combination in accordance with (7), of two conjugate
circuits of the type appearing in Fig. 1. The realization of Fig. 1 contains
no inductances in the general case h00 = 0; in the particular case h00 cf= 0,
where one inductance appears, it can be eliminated by replacing it by the
dualizer of Fig. 4.41 with Z = jX, closed on a capacitance.
h1/wf hn/w~
1
hoo
~,.
1/ho
l/h1 1/hn
Fm. 5.2
19. If the expansion into partial fractions is applied to the admittance, rather
than to the impedance, every term of (8) or (9) is realized as the admittance
of a simple one-port (which is the dual of the simple one-port of the first
case), and the total one-port is the parallel combination of the simple
constituents. The resulting configuration for real lossless one-ports is shown

in Fig. 3. The circuits of Figs. 2 and 3 are called Foster realizations.
1'0-------
Fm. 5.3
20. For p = jw, a para-odd function takes a purely imaginary value Z(p) =
jX( w), owing to (I). The real function X( w) is called reactance when deduced
from an impedance, and susceptance when deduced from an admittance.
In the expansion (8), the reactance is the sum of the individual reactances
Xo, hi/ (Wi - w) and hoo w, all nondecreasing functions ef w except at the pole Wi
where the second one jumps from + oo to - oo with increasing w. This
proves that the reactance (and the susceptance) of a lossless one-port is a non-
decreasing function ef the frequency except at its poles. The sign of the reactance
changes when w passes a pole or a zero, since they are simple. Nondecreasing
behavior is thus only possible when poles and zeros alternate. We have thus
proved that the poles and zeros ef a para-odd positive function alternate on the
imaginary axis. In particular, a Foster function, being odd, is of the form
Z - H(p2 + w?) (p2 + w;2) .. .
(11)
(p) - p(p2 + wi)(p2 + w~) .. .
or of the reciprocal form, with H > 0 and O < w;_ < 1 w < w; < w2 · · ·• The
behavior of the corresponding reactance is shown in Fig. 4.
X(w)
)! w
!(
Fm. 5.4
21. As an example, Figs. 5 and 6 give the two Foster structures realizing a
1 1 1
FIG. 5.5 FIG. 5.6
reactance whose behavior versus frequency 1s shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 5
X{w)
if
FIG. 5.7
results from the admittance expansion, and the elements L1C1 resonate at
the zero wr of the reactance; Fig. 6 results from the impedance expansion,
and the elements Li_C{ antiresonate at the pole wa of the reactance. Since
both one-ports are equivalent for suitable element values, it must be possible
to express Li.C{q in terms of L1C1C2, and conversely. In a simple case like
this, it is not necessary to go through the partial fraction expansion, for the
equivalence is a particular case of the one between Figs. 4.33 and 4.34. It is
even simpler to identify both circuits at the critical frequencies wa, wr, and
w = oo. At high frequencies, the 2-port of Fig. 5 reduces to C2, whereas the
2-port of Fig. 6 reduces to the series combination of C{ and C2; this gives
C _ C'C'
1 2
(12)
2 -C, +C'
1 2
At the antiresonance of Li.Ci, the impedance of L 1C1 must be equal and

opposite to the one of C2 in order also to produce an antiresonance in Fig. 5;
the impedance of the elements L1C1C2 in series is thus zero, and L1 resonates
with the series combination of C1 and C2; this gives
( 13)
By similar reasoning, at the resonance of L1C1, L' must antiresonate with the
parallel combination of C{ and C2, whence
( 14)
Division of ( 13) by ( I 4) yields
w; C{
(15)
w~ C{ +c2
Multiplying the last two members of (15) by Cz. and comparing to (12), one
obtains
( 16)
With this value, (15) gives
( I 7)
whereas ( 13) gives
(18)
22. In addition to the mentioned realizations of a Foster function Z(p), a

number of equally economical realizations are obtained by arbitrarily
decomposing Z into Z1 +Z2 and by realizing Z1 in accordance with Fig. 2
and Z2 in accordance with Fig. 3. A similar decomposition can further be
applied to Z 1 and Z 2 , and so forth. Because the extraction of the contribu-
tions of the poles at zero or infinity of Z is a purely rational process (long
division of two polynomials), the above method becomes very simple if some
of these particular poles are separated. Since a reactance is an odd function,
it has necessarily a pole or a zero at p = 0, and also a pole or a zero at
infinity; the extraction can thus be iterated on the remaining function and
the whole synthesis process is rational, whereas the Foster realization required
finding the zeros of the denominator of Z. By systematically extracting the
poles at infinity, one obtains a simple recursive process and corresponding
I: rational explicit formulas for the element values, which will now be derived.
I
23. Consider the case where the Foster function Z(p) has a pole at infinity
(in the opposite case, its reciprocal has a pole at infinity, and the dual
realization process would work on the admittance), so that it is of the form
aopn + a2pn-2 + ...
(19)
Z(p) = a1pn- 1 + a3pn-3 + ···
where the last terms are an in the numerator and an-l in the denominator
for n even, whereas the converse situation holds for n odd. By performing
the long division in ( 19), one obtains
ao
Z(p) = - p + Zi(P) (20)
a1
where
(21)
with
(22)
and the reciprocal of (21) has a pole at infinity, so that the process can be
iterated on Y1 = 1/ Z1. The result is an expansion of the form
1 1
Z(p) =hip+ - - = b 1 p + - - - - - (23)
Y1(P) b2p +-1-
baP + ···
which is a Stieltjes continued fraction, with the element values
b1 =a0 /a 1; b2 =a1/a 2··· (24)
and the succession of divisions leading to (23) is identical to the Euclid
algorithm for computing the greatest common divisor of the numerator
and denominator of (19). By comparison with (4.1), one obtains the Gauer
canonic realization of Fig. 8 for a Foster function having a pole at infinity;
o---b_2_J___b_~J_
Fm. 5.8
if the function has no pole at infinity, the first element b1 is simply omitted.
24, We now establish explicit recurrence formulas for the element values b,
of Fig. 8. The results will first be stated on the example n = 7. Consider the
principal minors ~, of dimension i = I, 2, ... , 7 of the matrix
~ ao
aa a2 a1 ao
a5 a4 aa a2 a1 ao
a7 a5 a5 a4 aa a2 a1 (25)
a7 a5 as a4 aa
a7 a5 a5
a7
where the first two columns are the coefficients of the denominator and
numerator of (19), respectively, whereas the following pairs of columns are
the first pair shifted by I, 2, ... steps downward, and where the omitted
entries are zeros. The element values are
bi= ~~-1/~i~i-2 (i = 1, 2, ... , k) (26)

with the conventions
~ -a-1.
-1- 0 , (27)
Since one has
(28)
Eq. (26) is true for i = I and 2 and all n, for it yields the values resulting
from (22) and (24). For Foster functions of degree I or 2, there are no other
elements and the theorem is established. The validity of (26) will now be
proved by recurrence for degree n, assuming that it holds for degree n - I,
that is, for the reciprocal of (21). The Stieltjes expansion of (19) starts with
b1 for which (26) has already been checked, and the following elements
b2 , ba, ... , bn are the coefficients, to be denoted b~, b;, ... , b~_ 1 , of the
Stieltjes expansion of the inverse of (21). By hypothesis, these are given by
(26) in terms of determinants, to be denoted ~i, extracted from
a~a1 0 0 0 0
a; ...
[ a4
a6 a 5
a3
a~
a1
a3
0
a;
0
a1 ···i (29)
playing with respect to the inverse of (21) the same role as (25) does with
respect to (19). One thus has
bi= ~i:.1/~i ~i-2
The Brune synthesis 143
Since bi+l =bi, a comparison of (26) with i replaced by i + 1 shows that what
remains to be proved is
(30)
Let us border (29) by an upper row of zeros and then by the column a 1, a3 ,
a5, ... on the left. The resulting matrix is
~ 0 0 0 0 0
a3 ~; I al 0 0 0 0
a5 a'4 a3 a'2 al 0 0 (31)
a'7 a'6 a5 a'4 a3 a'2 al
By expanding a principal minor ~;'+1 of dimension i + 1 of (31) in terms of

the first row, one obtains
(32)
On the other hand, (31) is transformed into (25) by the operation
column (2k) + -a1ao column (2k - 1) ----+ column (2k)
owing to relations (22), so that one has ~;'+1 = ~Hl, hence
~i+l = al~i (33)

by (32). Writing (33) for three successive subscripts, one establishes (30).
The expression ( 19) is a Foster function iff all elements bi are strictly positive.
Since one may normalize (19) to have ao > 0, the conditions bi> 0 are
equivalent to ~i > 0 (i = I, 2, ... , n) by recurrence. Finally, (19) with
ao > 0 is a Foster function ijf ~i > 0 (i = 1, 2, ... , n).
The Brune synthesis

25. There is no analogue to the Foster synthesis for general immittances,
because a unipolar component in the partial fraction expansion of a positive
function is generally not a positive function. On the other hand, an analogue
to the Cauer synthesis is immediately deduced from 16. The admittance
ho/(p - jwo) corresponds to the impedance p/ho - jwo/ho, and (10) yields
the realization of Fig. 9. Since the synthesis of the positive function Z(p) of
degree m is thus reduced to the synthesis of the positive function Z1(P) of
degree m - I, and since the synthesis of functions of degree zerci is trivial,
the general synthesis is established by recurrence. In the above extraction
we assumedjwo finite; if Zo vanishes at infinity, ho/(p - jwo) is replaced by
Ro jXo 2
1
1/ho
Z(p)~ Z1(P)
-juutho
1'
2'
Fm. 5.9
hop, and the shunt branch of Fig. 9 is replaced by a capacitance 1/ho. On

the other hand, if wo = 0, the imaginary resistance in the shunt branch
simply disappears. In conclusion, afunction Z(p) is the immittance ef a concrete
passive one-port if! it is a positive function. The iterative process uses in general
one reactive element and three constant elements per unit of degree. The
realization of a function of degree m thus employs the number of elements
announced in 5, and is therefore canonic.
26. The process can be applied to a real function but yields a realization
using imaginary resistances. In the remainder of this section, we discuss the
possibility of transforming the process in such a way that only real elements
occur in the final realization. Whenever jwo of 16 coincides with a pole of Z
(i.e., if X 0 = oo), a real reactance of form (7) can be extracted, and the
remainder is a positive real function. Similarly, whenever one has Xo = 0,
the positive real function Z(p) - Ro has a zero at ±jwo, and a pole can be
extracted from its inverse. One of the above cases necessarily occurs if the
point jw 0 where Re Z is minimum is zero or infinity, because the values
Z(O) and Z( oo) are real for a real function. In all other cases, the resulting
function Z1(P) in (10) is positive but not real. One then repeats the process
on Z1(P) at the conjugate point -jwo; it will be shown in 28-32 that the
imaginary resistances generated in both successive steps cancel, so that one
obtains a realization of Z(p) by means of a real 2-port closed on a real
positive function Z2(P) whose degree is smaller by two units than the degree
of Z(p). The resulting real process (Brune process)! is iterated until the degree
of the positive real function is reduced to O or 1. In the first case, the realiza-
tion is trivial; in the second case (degree 1) the minimum Ro of the real part
is necessarily reached at zero or infinity (the minimum can only occur at
two conjugate points for a function of degree 2 at least), so that the synthesis
is achieved by resistance and reactance extractions, as will now be shown.
27. A positive real function of degree 1 is of the form
Z(p) = ap b + (34)
ep+d
Since Z(0) and Z( oo) are nonnegative, and since Z(p) can have no positive
pole or zero, all coefficients a, b, e, dare of the same sign and can be assumed
to be nonnegative. Conversely, the positiveness of all coefficients is sufficient
to ensure that (34) is a positive function, for it is analytic in Rep> 0, and
its real part on the imaginary axis
ajw +
b bd aew 2
Re---=----
+
cjw + d d2 + e2w2
is positive for all w. For ab - be< 0, the extraction of the value at infinity by
a eb -ad
Z(p) = ~ + e(ep + d) (35)
yields for the remaining admittance the decomposition

+
e(ep d) e2 ed
_e_b___a_d_ = -eb---a-dp + -eb---a-d
and the realization of Fig. 10 is obtained. For ab - be> 0, the second term
c2
cb-ad
ale
cb-ad
---
cd
FIG. 5.10
of (35) is negative; this indicates that the minimum of the real part is not
reached at infinity, thus necessarily at zero. The extraction of the value at
zero by
b (ad - be)p
Z(p) =d+ d(ep+d)
yields for the remaining admitta __ ce the decomposition

d(ep + d) de d2
-(a_d__-b-e)-p = -ad---be + (ad - be)p
and the realization of Fig. 11 is obtained. Finally, the case ad - be= 0 is

trivial, for (34) then reduces to a constant. The numbers of elements in
Figs. IO and 11 agree with 5.
ad-be
d2
b/d
I 1 1'
·'
ad-be
ed
Fm. 5.11
28. Consider the expression ( I 0) for p = jw 0 + s and s small. The term

ho/(p-jwo) =ho/s tends to infinity, whereas l/Z1(P) remains finite, since
the pole has been extracted in the first term. Consequently, to the first
order in s, ( IO) becomes
Z(jwo + s) =Ro+ jXo + s/ho (36)
The element values of the 2-port of Fig. 9 depend only on the parameters
Ro, Xo, and ho of the Taylor expansion (36). On the other hand, the residual
impedance Z1(P) is obtained by solving (IO) to yield
Z1(P) = [(Z(p) -Ro - jXo)- 1 -ho/(p - jwo)J- 1 (37)
When repeating the process on (37) at the conjugate point, one has to find
the Taylor expansion of Z1( -jwo + s). Fors real, the expression Z( -jwo + s)
appearing in the right-hand member of (37) is the conjugate of (36) if the
original impedance Z(p) is a real function. This gives
Z1( -jwo + s) = [( -2jXo + s/ho)-1 - ho/( -2jwo + s)]-1 (38)
When the second member of (38) is evaluated to the first order in s, one
obtains an expression of the type
(39)
with
2Xowo wo -hoXo
Xi-----· hi=ho---- (40)
- hoXo -wo' wo +hoXo
Since there is no term Ri in (39), no real resistance extraction is needed at
the conjugate point. The 2-port of the second extraction is thus the one of
Fig. 9 where the parameters Ro, Xo, ho, wo are replaced by 0, Xi, hi and
-w 0 , respectively. The combination of both 2-ports gives Fig. 12.
FIG. 5.12
29. As residue corresponding to a pole on the j-axis, hi of (40) is necessarily

positive. Since ho is also positive, one must have w~ - h~ Xl > 0, or2
lwol > lhoXol (41)
30. At infinite frequency, the 2-port of Fig. 12 reduces to its total series
impedance Ro+ j(Xo + Xi). With the value (40) of Xi, this impedance is
generally not real and the 2-port of Fig. 12 cannot be transformed into a
real 2-port unless the imaginary resistance -j(Xo + Xi) is added in series
at the output (and subtracted from the residual impedance). After this
modification, one can show in various ways that the 2-port becomes real, for
instance by a ~ - Y transformation on the last three branches of Fig. 12.
In 31-32 we give a different proof, preparing for various extensions in later
chapters. In any case, once the extracted 2-port is proved real, the residual
impedance becomes automatically a positive real function.
31. By (41), tht:: expression

n = (wo + hoXo)/(wo -hoXo) (42)
is nonnegative. By (40), hi and the total series imaginary resistance then
take the values
Xi+Xo= -nXo (43)
By adding jXo to (39), one obtains the simple expression

Z1( -jwo + e) + jXo = n( -jXo + s/ho) (44)
One may then incorporate jX0 into the residual impedance of Fig. 9 and
thus add a series branch -jX0 at the output of the extracted 2-port. The
lossless part (omitting Ro) of the resulting 2-port is redrawn in Fig. 13. By
I
.,.I
I
Fm. 5.13
(4.5) its impedance matrix is
~ [P -jwo '. jhoXo p-jwo ] (45)

ho P-Jwo p -jwo - jhoXo
Its determinant is the constant xi. By (4.21), its chain matrix is
I [P - jWo + jho Xo (46)

p-jwo ho
32. The repetition of the extraction process on the modified residual impe-
dance (44) involves a second 2-port whose chain matrix is deduced from (46)
by replacing wo, ho, Xo by -wo, ho/n, and -nXo, respectively. The chain
matrix of the combined 2-port is obtained by multiplying the individual
chain matrices. After a few simplifications resulting from the replacement of
hoXo/wo by its value (n - I)/(n + I) deduced from (42), the result is
1 [ P + wi/n
2 (I+ n)h0 X~p] (47)
P2 + w~ (I + n)h p/n 0 +
p2 nw~
The 2-port of chain matrix (4 7) is called a Brune section. It is lossless reciprocal
as the 2-ports of Fig. 13 from which it originates, and is real since imaginaries
have disappeared in (4 7).
Partial specification of an immittance 149
33. To realise the Brune section, we first deduce from (47) its impedance
matrix, using (4.22). The result is
1 [np + w~/p (48)
(1 + n)h 0 np + w~/p
The terms in p are all identical and form a matrix of the type (4.11) repre-
senting a single-shunt inductance
n
L=---- (49)
(1 +
n)ho
The terms in p- 1 form a matrix of the type (4.29) with perfect coupling
(k = 1) representing the 2-port of Fig. 4.29 where Z is a capacitance
C = (l + n)h0 /w~ (50)
The series connection of the partial 2-ports yields Fig. 14. The element values
of this Brune section are (42) and (49-50) and all are positive .
10----.---, .----02
C 1 n
II
1'a-----------u2'
Fm. 5.14
34. This completes the synthesis of real passive one-ports and proves that
a function Z(p) is the immittance of a real concrete passive one-port if! it is a positive
real function. The Brune process uses two reactive elements (L and C) for a
reduction of degree by two units, hence one element per unit of degree. It
uses a total of two constant elements (the transformer of Fig. 14 and the
resistance Ro in series at the input), hence one constant element per unit of
degree. The realization of a function of degree m thus employs the number
of elements announced in 5 and is canonic.
Partial specification of an immittance

35. By 11, a positive (real) function Z can be decomposed into Z1 + Z 2
where Z1 is positive (real) without poles on the j-axis and where Z2 is of
the form (8) or (9) representing a (real) reactance function. The part Z1 is,
therefore, called minimum-reactance (for an impedance) or minimum-susceptance

(for an admittance). Similarly, if one has Ro= 0 in 15, the corresponding
impedance Z is called minimum-resistance.
A rational function, anarytic in Rep> 0 (thus including the imaginary axis
and, in particular, the point at infinity), is called hurwitzian. A passive impedance
(admittance) is hurwitzian iff it is minimum-reactance (susceptance). The concept of
hurwitzian function is, however, weaker than the concept of positive function
in other respects, for there is no requirement o'n the sign of the real part.
This concept will also appear useful in other instances and deserves to be
examined in a general sense.
I
I +
36. Let Pt= °'i jw, (with 0t:t < 0) be the poles (oforders kt) ofa hurwitzian
I function. Since the function is finite at infinity, its expansion into partial
I
:1 fractions is then of the form
,I
•I
·I
f(p) = aoo + "L. (p _ft (51)
I
,I
' where aoo is a constant and fi, a polynomial of degree kt - l at most. By
' writing
.,
f (p) = u(p) + v(p) (52)
with
U = (j +f.)/2; V = (j-f.)/2 (53)
one has decomposed f into its para-even part u and its para-odd part v. By
(51) one has
2u(p ) = a"' + a"'* + "L. (p -Al•

J;, - "L. (p +
J;,.pt)k, (54)
*
2v(p) = a"' - a"' + "L. (P -J;,PY• + "L. (P +J;,.pt)k, (55)
Conversely, if u(p) is given and expanded into partial fractions, the terms
corresponding to poles Pt in Rep> 0 can be grouped in the first sum of (54)
and the terms corresponding to poles -ft in Rep < 0 in the second sum
of (54). As a consequence, (51) is determined, except for an arbitrary
imaginary constant, since only Re aoo appears in (54), and v(p) can be
deduced fromf(p), thus from u(p), within an imaginary constant. A similar
reasoning applies if v(p), rather than u(p), is given. To conclude: the para-
even part of a hurwitzian function determines the function and its para-odd part,
within an arbitrary imaginary constant; conversery, the para-odd part determines the
function and its para-even part, within tin arbitrary real constant. In particular, if
either u or v is constant, all.ft are zero in (54) or (55), and the function is
constant: if the para-even or para-odd part ef a hurwitzian function is constant, so
is the function. For p = jw, u and v become the real and imaginary parts ofJ,
respectively. Conversely, if u and v are given as functions of w, they are
defined as functions of p by analytic continuation (replacejw by p ). Conse-
quently, the above theorems give relations between the real and imaginary
parts of a minimum-reactance impedance.
37. In the case of a real hurwitzian function, the prefix "para" can be
dropped and the arbitrary imaginary constant is zero. Since u and v are,
respectively, even and odd in p, hence injw, it is sufficient to define the real
and imaginary parts at real positive frequencies. The above theorems,
applied to the case of a minimum-reactance real passive impedance Z(jw) = R(w) +
jX(w) become the following: R(w) determines X(w), thus Z(jw); X(w) deter-
mines R(w), thus Z(jw) within an arbitrary additive resistance; in particular, if R
is constant, one has X = 0, and if Xis constant (thus zero), R is constant. A general
real passive impedance is the sum of a minimum-reactance impedance and
of a pure reactance (Foster function). Since the latter has zero resistance at
all frequencies, the conclusions of the last theorem are not modified as
regards the deduction of R(w) from X(w). By contrast, X(w) is only deduced
from R( w) within an arbitrary additive Foster function.
38. A linear combination, with constant coefficients, of several hurwitzian

functions is hurwitzian, and the para-even and para-odd parts combine
linearly in the same way. One may thus expect that u(p) can be deduced
from v(p) by a linear functional operation. This is done in B.3---4. Moreover,
the extensions of these relations, in B.8, to functions with logarithmic singu-
larities on the imaginary axis suggests one may discuss the relations between
the real and imaginary parts of the function log Z(p), where Z(p) is an
immittance. Since Z and its inverse are analytic in Rep > 0, by 7 and 9,
theorem B.9 applies, and one may deduce the modulus of Z from its phase,
and conversely, within a constant phase or a constant factor in the modulus,
respectively. This will be done algebraically in 39-40.
39. A polynomial is called a Hurwitz pof)momial if all its zeros are in Rep < 0.
By 7 and 9, an irreducible passive immittance can be written in the form
Z = knrx/d/3 (56)
where n and d are Hurwitz and where rx and /3 are para-odd polynomials
containing the factors p + jwi accounting for possible simple zeros or poles
on the imaginary axis (including zero and infinity); all polynomials are
assumed monic and k is a constant. If the modulus is known on the imaginary
axis, one deduces ZZ* from ZZ* by analytic continuation. Since a and fJ
are para-odd, (5 7) gives
(57)
the double sign accounting for the possibility of an even or odd number of
para-odd factors. Moreover, (57) is irreducible with (56). Conversely, if ZZ*
is given, the factorization of (57) defines (56) uniquely, except for the angle
of k, since the zeros and poles in Rep< 0 of (57) have to be attributed to
n and d. This proves that the modulus of a passive immittance defines the Junction
except for an arbitrary constant phase.
40. From (56) one deduces
~= ± knd* (58)
:r., Z* k*dn*
:J the double sign arising again from the possibility of a cancellation of an even
I +
or an odd number of factors p jwi. On the imaginary axis, (58) is Z/ Z* =
,l e2i 0 and thus defines 0 within hr at every real frequency. Since (58) has
I neither zeros nor poles on the imaginary axis, it actually defines the smooth
' phase 0o(w), within a constant hr, and the true argument 0(w) differs from
·!
0o(w) by discontinuities, as explained in B.9. We now prove that the dis-
continuities are completely determined by 0o(w) and the fact that 0(w) must
.. be the phase of a positive function. First, the zeros of a and fJ which dis-
appeared in (58) are simple, so the discontinuities are ±1T. Secondly, the
condition Re Z > 0 on the imaginary axis is equivalent to
(59)
Since the given smooth function 0o(w) will not normally satisfy (59), jumps
must be added to 0o to transform it into 0 in order to satisfy (59), and this
completely defines the factors of a and /3 by a process illustrated in the
example of Fig. 15. Curve (a) is 0o(w), the indetermination of hr having
been raised to satisfy (59) at w = - oo. Proceeding from that point, one sees
that (59) is first violated at w1, and this requires a negative jump of 7T at
that frequency. This transforms the branch AB or curve (a) into branch
A'B' of curve (b) which would continue below -1T/2 after B' unless a
positive jump were made at w2 . Continuing this process, one obtains curve
(b) for 0( w) and this defines ex = p + jw2, /3 = (p + jw1) (p + jw3) (p + jw4).
From this example, it is obvious that this process uniquely deduces 0(w)
from 00 ( w) provided the initial value of 00 ( - oo) is uniquely defined. If
00( -oo) cf- k1T ± 1T/2, conditions (59) at -oo fix the value uniquely. If
00( - oo) is exactly ±7T/2 within k1T, conditions (59) at - oo alone are in-
sufficient to decide between -1T/2 and +7T/2, but the first value clearly must
I
I
(a)
3rr/2----------
I
I
rr/2---A --t-
I
0----+----+----+------1--w
-n/2--+-+--+--+-
I I I I
I I (b) I I
rr/2-~-EH
-T[/~7_ld_~► W
A' s·
FIG. 5.15
be adopted if 0o is increasing, and the second value if 00 is decreasing with

increasing frequency from - oo. It is only if 0o is constant at ±TT/2 that no
decision can be taken; one may jump from TT/2 to -TT/2 arbitrarily often.
Since 00 = ±TT/2 corresponds to Z/Z* = -1 or Z +
Z* = 0, an arbitrary
para-odd function is indeed a solution. With the exception of the last case,
it thus appears that Z/Z* determines the true argument of Z uniquely,
hence the polynomials ex and /3 and the angle of k, which is directly deduced
from the argument of Z( oo). On the other hand, the Hurwitz polynomials n
and d are defined by the factorization into nd* of the denominator of the
irreducible form of (58), and everything is then determined in (56) except
lkl which remains arbitrary. The resulting immittance is a positive function
because (56) is analytic in Rep> 0 and satisfies Re Z > 0, equivalent to
(59), on the imaginary axis and, by continuity, on small semicircular inden-
tations in Rep > 0 avoiding the poles on the j-axis; by the principle of the
minimum real part, one then has Re Z ~ 0 in Rep > 0. In conclusion, if if;
is a given rational Junction satisfying
(60)
I54 S. Synthesis of passive one-ports
t?e positive function Z satisfying

(61)
is unique within an arbitrary positive constant factor, except in the case if, = -1.
41. We complete the discussion by computing the degree of Zin terms of

the parameters of the given function (61 ). Since the degrees of the numerator
and denominator of the immittance (56) differ at most by one, one has
deg Z = ½deg nad/3 + e (62)
with
if deg na = deg d/3
(63)
if deg na cf= deg d/3
·I
'r In the construction ofO(w) from Oo(w), the number of jumps of ±1r, which
.t is the degree of the product a/3, is equal to the number of times 00 (w) crosses
I k1r ± 1r/2 at real finite frequencies, that is, the number mo of distinct roots of odd
multiplicity of if,= -1, excluding infinity. With
t deg if, = deg nd = m
!
1 (62) becomes
!
I deg Z =(m + mo)/2 + e (64)
Scale transformations
42. If the impedances of all elements of a real concrete network are multi-
plied by a common factor, any expression having the dimension of an
impedance is multiplied by the same factor; on the other hand, dimension-
less expressions, such as voltage or current ratios, remain invariant.
If all inductances of a real concrete lossless reciprocal one-port of impedance z(p)
are multiplied by a, all capacitances by (3, and if ideal transformers are not altered,
the impedance is changed into
Z(p) = v'a/(3 · z(pv'a/3) (65)

The theorem is proved by decomposing the transformation into two steps.
In the first step, all impedances are multiplied by v'a//3 (thus the induc-
tances are multiplied and the capacitances divided) and this accounts for
the first factor. In the second step, both inductances and capacitances are
multiplied by v'a/3, which is equivalent to a multiplication of p by the
same factor.
Scale transformations 155
Relations similar to (65) can be established for any one-port composed

of two kinds of elements only (R L or RC). The same reasoning fails in the
case of networks containing three types of impedance elements (RLC), or
gyrators, since only two dimensions (impedance and frequency )are available.
43. Practical realizations oflossless elements contain an unavoidable amount

of dissipation. A resistance r is thus generally associated in series with any
inductance L, and the ratio dL = r/L is the dissipation factor. Similarly, a
conductance g is associated in parallel with any conductance C, and the
dissipation factor is de= g/C. Consider a lossy one-port deduced from a loss-
less one-port by attributing to all inductances on one hand, and to all
capacitances on the other, the same dissipation factors de and dL. Any
impedance p L of an inductance is, therefore, replaced by p L + r = (p + dL)L,
Z(p) = J~
so one has ex= l + dLfp, and similarly, f3 = l + de/P, in (65), which becomes
P+dL
- - . z[v(p + dL)(p + de)] (66)
p+de
44. When the approximations dL ~ IPI, de~ IPI are legitimate, one has
within the first order in
e = ½(dL +de); 8 = ½(dL -de) (67)
( p + dL) 1/2 = l ~.
+ p' [(p + dL) (p + de)]11 = p + e
2
P+dc
z(p + e) = z(p) + ez'(p)

and finally,
Z(p) = z(p) +-p8 z(p) +dz(p)

e-
dp
(68)
Since the initial one-port was lossless, one has z(p) = jx( w) ; the real part
of (68) becomes
8x (w) e dx (w)
R(w)=--+ d (69)
w w
and gives the additional series resistance produced by a small dissipation of
the elements in a reactance.
45. Expression (69) must be nonnegative for all nonnegative de and dL.
In particular, for 8 = 0, that is, dL =de> 0 (uniform dissipation), one has
dx/dw > 0, and this confirms a consequence of Foster's theorem. On the other
hand, for s = o
> 0 (which means de= 0, dL > 0) or s = -o > 0 (which
means dL = 0, de> 0), one obtains the new inequality
dx
dw >1=-1
w
(70)
on the slope of a reactance.
46. Set ex= I and fJ =I/pin (66). This leaves the inductances invariant but
changes the capacitances into proportional resistances. Since the original
real lossless impedance was of the form (9), the transformed impedance is of
the form
- - n ~
Z(p) = vp. z(vp) =ho+ p L - - + hoop (71)
i=lP +ext
where the ext (equal to w;) and the h; are real positive. Every real one-port
containing no capacitances has an impedance ef the form (71). Conversely, any
function ef the form (71) with ext > 0, ht> 0 can be realized as the impedance ef an
R L one-port: it is sufficient to synthesize the transformed function z(p) by
Foster or Cauer techniques and to change all capacitances into proportional
resistances.
47. A similar method applies to produce RC one-ports: with ex= I/p, fl= I
the capacitances of a reactance are not altered while the inductances are
replaced by proportional resistances. One then obtains
- n ht
Z(p) = z(vp)/ vp = ho/P + L - - + hoo (72)
i=lP +ext
with ext> 0, hi> 0. Note that (72) is the partial fraction expansion of Z(p),
whereas (71) was not, because of the factor p appearing in the I-term;
(71) is, however, immediately deduced from the partial fraction expansion
of Z(p)/p.
48. In both expressions (71) and (72), the poles -ext of the impedance are
negative real, and the same holds for the zeros: it is sufficient to use the
partial fraction expansion of the admittance. In any case, a pole or zero jwi
of the initial reactance gives a pole or zero -w;of the transformed impedance
so the alternation of the poles and zeros on the imaginary axis for a reactance
is transformed into an alternation of poles and zeros of the R L and RC
impedance or admittance on the negative real axis. On that axis, each term
of (7 I), thus the total, is increasing from p = - oo to p = 0. Since the func-
tion is positive for p > 0, the last critical point (pole or zero) met before the
origin, or coinciding with the origin, is a zero. On the other hand, the
Scale transformations 157
impedance (72) of an RC one-port is composed of decreasing terms, and

since it is also positive for p ~ 0, the last critical point (before, or at the
origin) is a pole. On the imaginary axis, each term of Re Z, thus the total, is an
increasing function of w for an R L network and a decreasing function for an RC
network. The inverse properties hold for Re Y.
chapter 6
Reflection and transmission
Reflection coefficient
1. Consider a concrete one-port containing internal generators. After elimina-
tion of the internal variables, one obtains a nonhomogeneous relation of the
+
form Av = Bi k between the port variables i and v, k being a linear com-
bination of the internal generator voltages and currents. If A cf. 0, the relation
becomes v = Zi + e; if B cf. 0, it becomes i = Yv + J. It is convenient to
change the sign convention for the current in a generator one-port to
prepare its interconnection with some load impedance: if v and i are the port
variables of the load, the variables of the generator one-port are v and -i, and
the one-port equations will thus be written
v=e -Zi (1)
or
i =J-Yv (2)
In form ( 1), the one-port appears as equivalent to a voltage generator e in
series with the impedance Z; this is Thevenin's theorem. In form (2), the one-
port is a current generator Jin parallel with the admittance Y; this expresses
Norton's theorem. Since v = e for i = 0, e is the open-circuit voltage of the
generator one-port; similarly,J is its short-circuit current. Since Eqs. (1) and
(2) are equivalent, one has J = e/ Z and Y = 1/ Z. Finally, Z is the internal
impedance of the generator n-port: it is the impedance seen from the port
when all internal generators are reduced to zero (voltage generators replaced
by short circuits and current generators replaced by open circuits). Note that
the equivalent circuits established by Thevenin's or Norton's theorem hold
158
i
Reflection coefficient 159
true only for external behavior and do not lead to a correct appraisal of the
internal power distribution in the one-port; for instance, in an open circuit,
the internal power consumption is zero for the Thevenin's equivalent circuit
but not for Norton's circuit.
2. When a generator of e.m.f. e and internal positive resistance Ri is connected

to a positive load resistance R, the active power dissipated in the load
(3)
is maximum with respect to R for R = Ri, that is, when the load resistance is
matched to the internal resistance of the generator. At matching, the voltage
on the load is v = e/2 and the power in the load is
wo = iel 2 /4Ri (4)

so that (4) is the maximum available power from a generator of given e and Ri.
Conversely, if the open-circuit voltage e and the maximum available power
w 0 of a generator are given, its internal impedance, if it is resistive, can be
deduced by (4). Note that, at matching, the same power is dissipated in the
load and in the generator resistance, so the power efficiency is only 50%. If a
resistive generator R and a load resistance Ri cf= R are to be interconnected,
maximum power transfer is achieved by inserting a matching transformer
of ratio
I/n = (R/Ri)I/2 (5)
If a reactancejX is inserted in series between the generator and the load
+ +
considered above, the current in the loop is i = e/(R Ri jX), and the
active power dissipated in the load is
w= Rlil 2 = lel 2R/[(R + Ri) 2 + X 2]

which is always smaller than (3), and reduces to (3) for X = 0. The case of a
generator of internal impedance Zt terminated on a load Z is equivalent to
the case of a generator of impedance Re Zt connected to a load Re Z through
a series reactance X = Im (Z + Z;). The cancellation of the reactance occurs
for Im ( Z + Z;) = 0, whereas matching of the resistive impedances corres-
po_nds to Re (Z - Z;) = 0. Both equations are combined into Z; = Z*. As a
consequence, the load giving the maximum power transfer corresponds to
conjugate matching, and the maximum available power from a generator ef passive
internal impedance Z; is lel 2 /4 Re Z;. Conjugate matching cannot generally be
achieved with the help of an ideal transformer since a real transformer only
alters the modulus of an impedance, but not its angle. Also conjugate match-
ing at all frequencies is generally impossible in the field of passive elements;
for instance, an impedance R + jwL should be matched to R - jwL which
involves a negative inductance.
160 6. Reflection and transmission
3. The current produced by a generator (e, Zi) into a load Z is

(6)
whereas, if the load should be equal to zt, the current would take the value
io = e/(Zt Zi) + (7)
The relative difference between (6) and (7) is
zo -z Z-Z:I'
---'-=s (8)
zo z+zi
and is called the reflection coefficient (or reflectance) ef Z relative to Zi (the direction
is important). Owing to the appearance of zt in (8), the reflectance is not
an analytic function of the complex frequency p unless Zi is constant. The
case where Zi is a real constant R is of particular interest, for (8) is then a
real analytic function with Z.
4. For Zi = R, and in terms of the normalized impedance z = Z/R, (8)

reduces to
s = (Z -R)/(Z +R) = (z -1)/(z + 1) (9)
and the inverse expression is
z= (1 +s)/(1 -s) ( I 0)
From (9) and (10) one deduces
I -ss*
z+z*=2--- ( 11)
11 -sl2
2(z + z*)
I -ss* = - - - - ( 12)
lz + I 12
A passive impedance Z(p) is a positive function, and so is the normalized
impedance z = Z/R if R > 0. By (11) and (12), the relations z +
z* > 0 and
I -ss* > 0, thus lsl 2< I, are equivalent. A rational function s(p) satisfying
Isl 2::;;: I in Rep> 0 is called bounded. As a consequence, the inverse trans}orma-
tions (9-10) relate a positive (real) function z(p) and a bounded (real) function s(p),
and the reflectance of an impedance with respect to a positive resistance is a (real)
bounded function if the impedance is (real) passive. Since lsl 2 0, a bounded function is hurwitzian (definition in 5.35). Conversely, a
hurwitzian junction satisfying Isl 2::;;: I on Rep= 0 is bounded, for the inequality
in Rep > 0 results from the theorem B.2 on the maximum modulus.
If Z is changed into its dual with respect to R, the normalized impedance
z is changed into 1/ z, and (9) is changed into -s: duality changes the sign of a
reflectance. In particular, the reflectance of an open circuit (z = oo) is I and
the reflectance of a short circuit is -1.
Reflection coefficient 161
5. Relations (11-12) hold if conjugates are replaced by para-conjugates

(lower asterisks) everywhere, so that the property (5.1) of a para-odd function
is changed into
( 13)
and, in particular, into ss* = 1 or
Isl= i for p =jw (14)

A function satisfying ( 14) is called para-unitary; it then satisfies ( 13) for all p
by analytic continuation. By the theorem of the maximum modulus, a
hurwitzian para-unitary function is bounded. As a consequence, the inverse trans-
formations (9-10) relate a positive para-odd (real) function z(p) and a hurwitzian
para-unitary (real) function s(p). A real para-unitary function is simply called
unitary.
6. Let s(p) = h(p) /g(p) be bounded para-unitary and assume it is irreducible.

Since s is hurwitzian, g(p) is a Hurwitz polynomial, that is, a polynomial
without zeros in Rep:::;; 0. Since sis para-unitary, one has hh* = gg*. Since
hand g are coprime, h must divide g*, and h* must divide g. This shows that
hand g* coincide except for a constant factor k of unit modulus; thus h =kg*.
Finally, a bounded para-unitary function is of the form
(15)
where g is a Hurwitz polynomial and k a constant of unit modulus.
7. Ifs is, in addition, a real function, g is a real Hurwitz polynomial, and

one has k = ±I. Consequently, a real bounded unitary Junction is of the form
(16)
where g is a real Hurwitz polynomial. By 5, the immittance deduced froti s by
(10), that is,
( 17)
is a Foster function. If one denotes by ge the even part of g and by g0 its odd
part, ( 17) becomes ge/g0 or g0 /ge. This proves that the ratio of the even part over
the odd part of a real Hurwitz polynomial, and the inverse ratio, are Foster functions.
Conversely, the sum of the numerator and the denominator of a Foster Junction is a real
Hurwitz polynomial. In the notations of (5.19), this sum is
( 18)
Finally, by 5.24, the real polynomial ( 18) with ao > 0 is Hurwitz if! all principal
minors Ll1 (i = 1, 2, ... , n) of (5.25) are strictly positive.
Scattering matrix
8. In terms of the normalized quantities v/JR, iJR, Z/R (this assumes once
more R > 0), to be denoted simply v, i, z in the following, a one-port is
defined by the impedance equation v = zi. Replacing z by v/i in (9), one
obtains s = (v -i)/(v + i), thus
v - i =s(v +i) ( 19)
With the notations
Y=V-Z (20)
Eq. (19) becomes

, y=sx (21)
and characterizes the one-port as well as the impedance equation. The new
electrical variables x and y replacing i and v are produced by a rotation of
45° in the (i, v)-plane and have a simple physical interpretation which will
now be discussed. Note first that the transformation (20) is only a pure
rotation when it is orthogonal, that is, if factors I/J2 are incorporated in the
second members; since these factors cancel in (21), they will, however, be
omitted. Note also that the directions of x andy are the diagonals only in the
(i, v)-plane of the normalized variables; in terms of the true electrical
variables, the linear combinations occurring in (20) are v/JR ± iJR. The
plane of the true variables, however, has only an affine geometry since the
variables have different physical dimensions; the normalization is of interest
precisely because it allows the introduction of a metric.
Let the one-port of impedance Z be excited by a generator (e, R). The
equations of the terminated network are v = Zi and v = e - Ri. In terms of
the reduced variables (ef JR being also replaced by e), the equations are
v = zi and v = e - i. The last equation shows that one has x = e, so x is the
normalized generator voltage; since it is dimensionless, it will preferably be
called the generator signal. On the other hand, relation (8), or i = io - si0 ,
shows that the actual current in the circuit is the superposition of the
current i0 at matching and of a refl,ected current sio (flowing in the opposite
direction) produced by a fictitious generator located in the load. Since (8) is
homogeneous, it is not altered after normalization, and the normalized
e.m.f. of the fictitious generator is se, that is, (21), soy is similarly called the
rf!flected signal. Because of an obvious analogy with optics, the generator (or
incident) signal and the reflected signal are also called incoming (on Z) and
outgoing (from Z) wave amplitudes.
Scattering matrix 163
9. Consider an n-port, and normalize the variables at port i relatively to

some strictly positive resistance Rt; the variables are thus Vt/ JRt and itJRt
but they are still denoted by Vi and ii. The n-port equation is of form (3.4),
even in terms of the normalized vectors v and i. We now define the incoming
and outgoing signal to each port by scalar relations with subscript i similar to
(20). The vectors x and y, of entries Xi and Yi, are called the incoming and
outgoing wave vectors, and the relations (20) remain true as vector relations.
Finally, solving (20) for i and v by
V = (x +y)/2; i = (x -y)/2 (22)
and substituting in (3.4), one transforms then-port equation into A(x +y) =
B(x -y) or
(B -A)x = (B + A)y (23)
For a passive n-port, det (B + A) does not vanish identically, as proved in
3.31. As a consequence, (23) can be written 1
y=Sx (24)
with
S= (B +A)-I(B-A) (25)
and the scattering matrix S always exists for a passive n-port if defined with respect to a
set of strictly positive resistances Rt .
10. The physical interpretation of the scattering coefficients (entries StJ of S)

will be derived with the help of the following lemma: if some k ports ef an
n-port of scattering matrix Sare terminated on their reference resistances (the values
used as references for normalization at the k ports, respectively), the scattering
matrix of the resulting (n - k )-port is the submatrix ef S corresponding to the non-
terminated ports. This is proved by noting that the terminating conditions
Vt= -R,it, thus Vt= -i, in normalized variables, give Xi= 0 by (20); dis- ,
regarding the Yi corresponding to the terminated ports, (24) reduces to a
similar equation involving the stated submatrix.
11. The diagonal entry Su of the scattering matrix of an n-port is the reflection
coefficient, with respect to Rt , of the impedance ef the one-port produced by closing all
other ports of the n-port on their reference resistances. This is the particular case of
the lemma, where all k = n - I ports except i are terminated. The ith
equation (24) reduces to the scalar relation Yi = Sit Xi similar to (21), and the
interpretation of Su as reflection coefficient results. Similarly, thejth equation
(24) reduces to Yi = S1t Xi. Since there is no generator in port j -:I= i, one has
e1 = x1 = 0, thus VJ= Y1/2 by (22); on the other hand, Xt is the generator
signal ei if a generator of resistance Riis connected to port i. Consequently, the

last relation becomes VJ= S1i etf2, and SJi is interpreted as the ratio 2v1/ei; the
entry SJi of the scattering matrix is called the transmittance (or transmission
coefficient) ef the n-portfrom port i to port j. Note that ei/2 is the reference normalized
voltage at port i, that is, the voltage which would appear at this port under
matching conditions, so the transmittance from port i to port j is the ratio ef the
normalized voltage at port j to the reference normalized voltage at port i produced by a
generator of reference internal resistance at port i, when all other ports are closed on their
reference resistances. In terms of denormalized variables, the definition of
S1i is
S-· _ v1JRJ (26)
ii - ei/2jRi
and the square of its modulus
(27)
is the ratio ef the power received at port j to the maximum power available from port i
under reference terminating conditions.
12. The expression (3.15) of the active power entering an n-port is not
altered if i and v are replaced by the corresponding normalized vectors, since
J
each entry Vt is divided and the associated ii multiplied by Rt. By (22), one
obtains
8 Re w = (x -j) (x +y) + (x +j) (x - y)
thus, by (24),
4 Rew =XX -jy =x(ln -SS)x (28)
so that the Hermitian matrix 1n -SS is positive definite in Rep ;::::: 0 for a
passive n-port. A matrix S such that In - SS is positive definite in Rep ;::::: 0
is called a bounded matrix, for this definition reduces to the concept of bounded
function in the case ofa scalar. We have thus proved that the scattering matrix
ef a passive n-port normalized to a set of strictly positive resistances is bounded. More-
over, the scattering matrix of a real n-port referred to real terminations is real, since the
matrices A and B of (25) are then real.
13. By (20), relations (24) can be rewritten as (v - i) = S( v + i) or

(In - S)v =(In+ S)i (29)
The dualizing operation corresponds to interchanging i and v, thus Sand -S
in (29). The replacement of an n-port by its dual changes the sign ef the scattering
matrix.
i...
Attenuation and phase 165
14. As a particular case of (28), for a lossless one-port, one has 1n - SS = 0,

thus SS = 1n, on Rep = 0, and the scattering matrix of a lossless n-port is
unitary on the imaginary axis. Since for p imaginary S coincides with §, one
also has
(30)
for all p, by analytic continuation. A matrix S satisfying (30) for all pis called
para-unitary, and the scattering matrix ef a lossless n-port referred to resistive termina-
tions is para-unitary.
15. Since each term of the first member of (2.27) is scalar, the first one, for
instance, can be replaced by its transpose; by (22) and (24) the resulting
expression is
i~ v/l - v~ i/l = (x~y/l -y~ x/l) /2 = x~(S - S')x13 /2

Since this expression must vanish for all pairs of states for a reciprocal n-port,
one must have S = S' and the scattering matrix ef a reciprocal n-port is symmetric.
16. The ith diagonal entry of the matrix ln -SS is 1 - LiISiil 2• For a
bounded matrix one thus has Li ISiil ::;;: 1 in Re p > 0, hence a fortiori
2
ISii 2 ::;;: 1, so that every entry ef a bounded matrix is a bounded function, thus also a
1
hurwitzian function. A matrix all of whose elements are hurwitzian functions

is called a hurwitzian matrix. Finally, a bounded matrix is hurwitzian.
Attenuation and phase

17. The product of two hurwitzian functions is hurwitzian. Such a multi-
plicative invariance also holds for bounded functions and para-unitary
functions. A multiplicative property is changed into an additive property by
taking logarithms. Since the modulus of a bounded function does not exceed
1, its logarithm is negative; it is more convenient to deal with positive
expressions and thus define
(31)
#
The logarithmic transmittances and refl,ectances thus defined are generally complex.
Separating the real and imaginary parts by
rii = Aii +JBii

one has
(32)
(33)
For i =I= j, A1t and B1t are called attenuation (or loss) and phase-shift from port i
to port j, respectively. For i = j, Aii and Bu are called return loss and return
phase at port i. Attenuations are expressed in nepers and phases in radians.
18. Since s(p) = S1i(P) is a bounded function (we drop the indices in the
following discussion), the corresponding attenuation A is nonnegative in
Rep > 0 and, in particular, at real frequencies. Although s has no poles on
Rep = 0, it may have zeros on this axis, and A then becomes infinite. Such
frequencies are thus called transmission zeros or attenuation poles (although the
latter expression is improper since the singularity of A is logarithmic).
Although the phase is only defined by (33) within 2hr, the indetermination
only exists at a single frequency if the function is defined as continuous on the
imaginary axis, the attenuation poles being avoided by semicircular indenta-
tions arbitrarily located in the right half-plane. As in B.7, but with a change
of sign due to the minus sign in (33), one then has
B(wo+) -B(wo-) = -mr (34)
if wo is an attenuation pole of order n. Finally, B is determined for all w if it
is defined as its principal value ( -TT < B <TT) at w = 0; if B is continuous at
w = 0, the above convention is clear; if it is discontinuous, one naturally
decides that B(0) is defined as [B(-0) +B( +0)]/2.
19. For a real n-port, sis a real function of p, but r is not, as is shown by the
counterexample s = -l which gives r = jTT. However, the derivative
r
r' = s' /s, is real with s, so is real with p except for an imaginary constant.
Since s(0) is real, B(0) is O or TT depending on whether s(0) is positive or
negative, and the imaginary constant is O or TT. As a consequence, the attenua-
tion of a real n-port is an even function cif w and the phase-shift is an odd function
except for a possible constant TT. The addition of TT to the phase clearly corresponds
to the multiplication of S1t by -1, thus to a polarity reversal of port i
relatively to portj. Since the attenuation and phase of a real n-port are thus
completely specified by their behavior at positive frequencies, usually only the
attenuation poles at positive frequencies are mentioned, the associated con-
jugates poles being automatically deducible. Since possible attenuation poles
at w = 0 ( w = oo) are their own conjugates, it is convenient to split them into
two half-poles at w = +o and w = -0 (w = ± oo); this is coherent with the
attribution of one half of the phase discontinuity to the transition from -0 to
0 and of the other half to the transition from Oto +o. In accordance with this
terminology, a real transmittance behaving as k/pn near p = 0 (kpn near
p = oo) is said to produce an attenuation pole of order n/2 at p = 0 (p = oo).
20. If a transmittance s is para-unitary, ( 14) gives A = 0 for all real w, and

s(p) is, consequently, called an all-pass function. In the following we will also
Attenuation and phase 167
use this term for reflectances, so the expressions all-pass function and bounded
para-unitary function become synonymous. In the form (15) of an all-pass
function, let the Hurwitz polynomial g(p) be factorized and consider a factor
p - Po. Since Re Po < 0, it is convenient to set Po = -cco - jwo and the factor
is p + cco + jwo. The corresponding factor of g*(p) = [g( -p*)]* is then
-p + cco - jwo and the factor of ( 15) is
cco -jwo - P
(35)
cco + jwo + p
By (33), the phase-shift corresponding to (35) at real frequencies
B = - arg
cco - jwo - jw
. .
w
= 2 arc tg - - -
+ wo (36)
+
cco )WO JW + CCO
is a monotone increasing function of w, from -TT at w = - oo to 7T at w = oo.

Since the phase-shifts resulting from the various factors (35) of ( 15) add up,
and since the factor k contributes a constant phase, the phase-shift of an all-pass
function of degree n increases monotonically by 2nTT from w = - oo to w = +
oo. For
a real all-pass function, the phase-shift is an odd function except possibly for a
constant equal to 7T ( corresponding to k = - I in the above discussion, as
shown in 19), so that the increase is nTT from w = 0 to w = + oo.
21. A bounded function s(p) having a zero Po in Re Po > 0 can be factored into
s = s1s2 with
s2 = (p - Po)/(p + Pt) (37)
and s1 bounded; the degree of s1 is equal to the degree of s, unless -Pt is a pole of s, in
which case the degree decreases by one unit. Since (37) is para-unitary [it is an
all-pass function of the form (35)], sand s2 have the same modulus on the
imaginary axis, so that lsl 2 ::=;:; 1 is equivalent to ls1l 2 < 1. On the other hand,
s1 = s/s2 = s(p + Pt)/(p - Po) (38)
is hurwitzian withs since the factor p - Po cancels up and down by hypoth-
esis. Since s1 is hurwitzian and satisfies ls11 2 < I on the imaginary axis, it is
bounded by virtue of the converse theorem of 4. The degree reduction occurs
if, in addition, the factor p + Pt cancels with the denominator of s.
22, Since all zeros in Rep > 0 of a bounded function can be extracted by
repeated applications of theorem 21, every bounded function is uniquely factorable
(except for a constant multiplier) in the form s = s1s2 where s1 is bounded para-unitary
and where s2 is bounded without zeros in Rep > 0. For a real function s, the
zeros in Rep > 0 are real or occur in conjugate pairs, so the factors are also
real functions. The para-unitary factor s2 is an all-pass function, and the
factor s1 which remains after the maximal all-pass extraction is called

all-pass free. By (31-33) the attenuations and phases corresponding to the
+
factors combine additively: one has B = B1 B 2 and A= A1, since A2 = 0
for an all-pass.
23. Consider an all-pass-free transmittances= h/g and the associated func-

tion ss* = hh*/gg*. As in 5.39, the factorization of this function determines s
uniquely within an arbitrary constant phase factor ei: the zeros in Re p < 0
of hh* and gg* have to be attributed to h and g, respectively, whereas the
zeros of hh* on thej-axis are of even multiplicity and have to be distributed
equally between h and h*. On the imaginary axis, ss* coincides with isl 2,
I which is e-2A by (32). If the attenuation A(w) is known, ss* is known by

analytic continuation. We have thus proved that the attenuation A(w)
determines the transmittance s(p) within a factor ei, and consequently the
phase B( w) within a constant cf,: the attenuation of an all-pass-free transmittance
determines its phase within a constant. If s(p) is not all-pass free, theorem 22
shows that B is deduced from A within the arbitrary all-pass phase B2: the
attenuation of a transmittance determines its phase within the phase of an arbitrary
all-pass. For that reason, an all-pass-free transmittance is also called minimum-
I
phase. In the case of a real transmittance, the arbitrary constant cf, is O or 1r.
If s(p) is all-pass fre~, r(p) = -log s(p) is analytic in Rep> 0 except
for possible logarithmic singularities on the imaginary axis arising from
corresponding zeros of s(p), and the results ofB.8-9 apply. This confirms the
last theorem and shows that, conversely, the attenuation is determined by the
phase within an arbitrary constant, provided the phase be given with its dis-
continuities.
24. If an all-pass-free transmittance has a zero of order n at infinity (n is the

degree difference between g and h, and n > 0 since the function is bounded),
relation (B.16) applies with a change of sign due to the minus sign in (33). If
the transmittance is not all-pass free, it contains an additional all-pass phase
of some degree k, whose phase increases monotonically by 2k1r by 20. Conse-
quently, one has in general
B( +oo) -B(-oo) = (n +2k)1r (39)
In the case of a real transmittance, the variations from - oo to -0 and

from +o to + oo are identical. Since the jump from -0 to +o is related by
(34) with the order m of the possible attenuation pole at w = 0, one has
B( +oo) -B( +0) = ( -n+m )

2 - + k 1r (40)
Relations between scattering and hybrid matrices 169
In accordance with the decision, in 19, to count poles at O and oo for half
their orders, (40) now holds if m/2 and n/2 designate the orders of the attenua-
tion poles at O and oo.
Relations between scattering and hybrid matrices

25. Let R be the diagonal matrix whose entries Rt are the positive resistances
with respect to which the port variables are to be normalized. Normalization
replaces Vt and it by vtf JRt and itftt, thus the vectors v and i by the
vectors R- 1! 2v and R 112i, where R 112 is the positive square root matrix of R, that is,
the diagonal matrix of entries JRt, and R- 1 / 2 its inverse. The impedance
equation v = Zi of an n-port can be written
(R-l/2v) = R-l/2ZR-l/2(Rl/2i)
If the normalized vectors are simply denoted by v and z, this equation

becomes
V = R-l/2ZR-l/2i
or
V = ZZ (41)
where the normalized impedance matrix is
z = R-l/2ZR-l/2 (42)
so that one has
(43)
and in particular Ztt = Zu/Rt.
Equation (41) is of the form Av = Bi, so S is given by a particular case
of (25) as
S = (z - ln)(z + ln)- 1 (44)
which reduces to (9) in the scalar case. By A.4, the following forms are
equivalent
S = 111 - 2(z + ln)-l = (z + ln)- 1 (z - In) (45)
By solving (45) for z, one obtains the inverse relation
z = 2(ln -S)-1 - In= (In +S)(ln -S)-1 (46)

which also results directly from a comparison of (29) and (41). Consequently
z exists ifdet (ln -S) :;icO.
26. Consider an n-port A having a normalized impedance matrix z and a

scattering matrix S. Form an n-port B by inserting a gyrator ofratio R 1 ( equal
to the reference impedance) in cascade with port 1 of A. Since the gyrator
permutes the port variables v1 and i 1, the normalized hybrid matrix h of
n-port B expressing (i1, v2, ... , vn) in terms of (v1, i2, ... , in) is z. The
normalized impedance matrix of the gyrator, deduced from (2.30) is
[-~ ~] (47)
and its scattering matrix computed by (45) is also (47). This shows, by (24),
that the gyrator effect is to change the sign of the outgoing signals at port 1
without altering the incoming signals. Consequently, the scattering matrix of
n-port Bis 0S with 0 = diag{ -1, 1, ... , 1}.
27. Leth be the normalized hybrid matrix of an n-port A and assume that
it is partitioned as in (3.8). By inserting gyrators in cascade with all shunt
ports (of subscript a), one forms an n-port B of normalized impedance matrix
h, hence of scattering matrix (h - ln)(h + ln)- 1 by (45). The scattering
matrix of n-port A is thus
I S = 0(h + ln)- 1 (h - In)
28. In particular, if his a normalized admittance matrixy, one has 0 = -ln

(48)
and
S = (In - y)(ln +y)-l = 2(ln +y)-l - In= (In+ y)- 1 (ln -y) (49)
The inverse relation is
y = 2(ln +S)- 1 - In= (In -S)(In +S) - 1 (50)
Consequently, y exists if det (1 n + S) # 0.
29. Consider an ideal transformer n-port 2 ofreal ratio matrix N. An equation

such as (1.27) can be written
(R!l 2ia) + (R!i 2NR-;; 112) (Rf 2ib) = 0
where Ra(Rb) is the diagonal matrix specifying the reference impedances at
the shunt (series) ports. In terms of the normalized ratio matrix
(51)
and of the normalized current vectors, the equation is again of the form
(1.27). Similarly, the matrix appearing in the voltage equation (1.30) after
Relations between scattering and hybrid matrices 171
normalization is the transpose of (51 ). The normalized hybrid matrix is thus

(3.10) where Nis replaced by (51). Ifwe still denote by Nthe normalized
ratio matrix (51), the scattering matrix is (48) or
-lr 0 ] [Ir -N ]-1 [-lr -N ]
S= [
0 ln-r N' ln-r N' -ln-r
= [lr N ]- 1 [ Ir (52)
N' -ln-r -N'
By computing the inverse in accordance with A.6, one obtains
(Ir+ NN')- 1 - N(ln-r + N' N)- 1 N'
s- [ N'(lr + NN')- 1 + (ln-r + N' N)- 1 N'
(lr+NN')- 1 N+N(ln-r+N'N)- 1 ]
N'(lr + NN' )- 1 N- (ln-r + N' N)-1
Several simplifications occur, for instance, owing to the identity
N'(lr + NN')- 1 = (ln-r + N' N)- 1 N' (53)
Since
(ln-r + N' N)N' = N'(lr + NN') = N' + N' NN'
the identity readily follows. Owing to (53) and to its transpose, the sub-
matrices of S take the following simpler forms:
Saa= (Ir - NN')(lr + NN')- 1 = 2(lr + NN')- 1 - Ir
Sab = 2(lr + NN')- 1 N = 2N(ln-r + N' N)-1
(54)
Sba = 2N'(lr + NN')- 1 = 2(ln-r + N' N)- 1 N'
Sbb = (ln-r + N' N)- 1 (N' N - ln-r) = ln-r - 2(ln-r + N' N)-1
30. In the particular case of a 2-port transformer of ratio n/ l, the matrix N

reduces to the scalar n, and (54) becomes
s-
-1
l [l -2nn2
+n2
2n ]
n2 -1
(55)
31. For a real lossless frequency-independent n-port, condition (30) reduces

to S'S= l n, thus expressing that the scattering matrix is orthogonal. If the
n-port is, in addition, reciprocal, Sis symmetric and the condition reduces to
S 2 = l n. It is easily checked that orthogonality and symmetry are auto-
matically ensured by the form (54). Conversely, if a constant real symmetric
orthogonal matrix is prescribed as the scattering matrix of an n-port, the
resulting n-port is lossless real reciprocal and has a hybrid matrix satisfying
(3.20), that is, H + H' = 0 and (3.25). Since (3.20) imposes Haa + H~a = 0
+
and Hbb H;,b = 0 on the submatrices, a comparison with (3.26) forces
Haa = Hbb = 0, and the hybrid matrix is of the form (3.10) defining an ideal
transformer n-port. This proves that every real lossless reciprocal frequency-
independent n-port is an ideal traniformer n-port, or equivalently, that every orthogonal
real constant symmetric matrix is ef the form (54), possibly after a symmetric
relabeling.
32. From (52) one deduces
ln +S=2 [ N'
Ir N
-ln-r
1-1[1Or
+
so that In S has rank r. Since S is symmetric and orthogonal all its eigen-
values are + +
I or - I, by A.64. From the rank r of In S, it follows that S
has exactly r eigenvalues equal to +I, thus n - r eigenvalues equal to - I.
Consequently, the sum of the eigenvalues is 2r - n and the trace of the scattering
matrix ef an ideal traniformer n-port ef rank r is 2r - n.
33. An n-port is called matched when simultaneous matching occurs at all

ports with respect to the reference resistances; all reflectances (diagonal
elements of S), and consequently the trace, are then zero. For a transformer
n-port of rank r, one then has n = 2r, so matched traniformer n-ports do not exist
for odd numbers ef ports.
34. Consider the problem of realizing an ideal transformer n-port of pre-

scribed symmetric orthogonal scattering matrix S. The rank r is immediately
deduced from the trace theorem 32. On the other hand, the elimination of
(Ir+ N' N)-1 between the first two equations (54) yields
N = Sab(Saa + lr)- 1 (56)
Since S + ln is of rank r, it contains an invertible principal submatrix
Saa + l r, and this defines the partition to be used in S in order to compute
Nby (56).
35. Expressions (54) remain valid for a complex ideal transformer n-port
if N' is replaced by N everywhere. The resulting scattering matrix is unitary
but not symmetric. It is not true, however, that every unitary matrix is of
form (54), for not every lossless constant n-port is a complex transformer
n-port: from the losslessness condition H +fl= 0, it is generally impossible
to deduce Haa = Hbb = 0, so t!he hybrid matrix is not of the form (3.10) with
N replacing N '.
Change of reference 173
Change of reference
36. In 3 we defined the reflection coefficient of a one-port of impedance Z
with respect to an arbitrary termination Zi [see Eq. (8)] and only later
specialized Zi into a positive resistance. This specialization was then kept
for n-ports, and the scattering matrix was defined only with respect to a set
of separate positive resistances at the ports. In 37-38, we remove this restriction
while still keeping the essential properties of the scattering matrix3; in
particular, we wish the scattering matrix of a passive n-port referred to passive
terminations to remain bounded (and para-unitary if the n-port is lossless).
37. Let us first assume that then-port has an impedance matrix Zand that
the set of terminations is itself an n-port of impedance matrix Zt (not neces-
sarily diagonal, if the terminations are not separate impedances). The
expression of the total active power supplied or absorbed by the terminations
involves only the matrix Zt +Zt. Let us, therefore, write
Zt =Rt+ Qi= (Zt

~ + (Zt - Zi)/2
+ Zt)/2 ~ (57)
where Rt is the hermitian part of Zt, and Qi the skew-hermitian part, as in
A.31. The active power absorbed by the terminations is not altered if Qt is
subtracted from the terminations and incorporated in the n-port. We thus
+
replace the original n-port Z closed on Zt by the n-port Z Qi closed on Rt.
Let us further insert two ideal transformer n-ports ofratio matrix N (generally
complex, but square and nonsingular) cancelling each other, between the
n-port and its terminations, as shown in Fig. 1. Since N is lossless, it is
Rt -- N: 1n - 1n: N Z+Ot
a. ~
Fm. 6.1
equivalent, in regard to active power distribution, to cut the system at point oc

of Fig. I, rather than at point /3, thus considering then-port N-1 ( Z +Rt) N-1
closed on N- 1Rt N-1 . If the original set of terminations Zt was passive, Rt is
hermitian positive definite, and one may choose N in such a way that
N- 1Rt N-1 = ~ becomes a diagonal matrix of positive elements, so the
n-port on the right of point oc of Fig. 1 is now terminated on separate positive
resistances at each port, and the known definition of the scattering matrix
applies. However, two remarks must be added at this point. First, the further
normalization similar to (42) with ~ playing the role of R is possible only if
I 174 6. Reflection and transmission
6. is strictly positive definite, thus if Rt is nonsingular (the set of terminations

must effectively load each port). Secondly, the transformation matrix N diagonal-
izing Rt is not unique, so we have not yet obtained a unique definition of the
scattering matrix. This indetermination is resolved by remarking that if we
wish relations such as (44) to remain true in spite of the transformation by
N, the unit matrix ln must remain invariant, so N must be unitary. By
A.58-60, the hermitian positive definite matrix Rt can be diagonalized by a
unitary traniformation N. Although this transformation is still not necessarily
unique (in case of multiple eigenvalues), it leads to a unique definition of the
scattering matrix, as will now be shown. With N unitary, the impedance
matrix at the right of point ,B becomes N( Z +
Qt) N. After normalization to 6.
+
according to (42), it becomes 6,- 1/ 2 N(Z Qt)Nfl.- 112. Finally, this matrix
seen from point a is
z = Nfl.-1l2N(Z + QtfNfl.-1l2N = Rt-112(z + Qt)Rt-112 (58)
where R}l 2 is the hermitian square root of Rt, defined in A.61 and proved to be
unique. The scattering matrix is ultimately deduced from (58) by (44). In
the resulting expression, one has
z ± ln = Rt-112(z +Qt± Ri)Rel/2
and, since Rt + Qt = Zt and Rt - Qt = Zt, the final expression is
S = Rt-112(z - Zi)(Z + Zi)-1R}12 (59)

This clearly reduces to (8) in the scalar case.
38. Conversely, (59) can be solved for Z to yield

z= (ln -R}12SRt-112)-1(zt + R}12SRt-112zt) (60)
so that then-port equation v = Zi becomes
(ln -R}t2sRt-112)v = (Zt + R}12SRt-112zt)i (61)
The identification of (61) with the general equation Av= Bi enables one to
define S independently of the existence of the impedance matrix Z. However,
the existence of the impedance matrix Zt, such that Rt = (Z +
Zt) /2 is
strictly positive definite, is necessary. Alternatively, since a change ofreference
is equivalent to the insertion of a transformer n-port between the old and new
terminations, the modified scattering matrix can be computed by the
following theorem.
39. A transformer k-port of nonsingular ratio matrix N (possibly complex) closed on

an n-port of scattering matrix S yields an (k-n)-port of scattering matrix
L = [N- 1 (ln +s) -N(ln -S)][N- 1 (ln +s) + N(In -S)J-l (62)
Applications to 2-ports 175
The equations of the transformer k-port are (4.41), and the interconnections
at ports b produce a sign change in ib if ib is taken as positive when entering
into the n-port of matrix S. The equations are thus
ia = Nib; Va= ft-lvb
By (22) the corresponding wave vectors are related by
Xa -ya= N(xb -yb); Xa +Ya= ft-l(xb +Yb)
Since Yb = Sxb, the sum and the difference of the last equations give
2xa=[N- 1 (1n+S) +N(ln-S)]xb
2ya = [N- 1 (1n +S) + N(ln -S)]xb
The elimination of Xb gives a relation ya= rxa where I: is (62).
40. The next theorem is similar to the formulas of 4.27. Ann-port of scattering
matrix
(n -k) (k)
(n -k)
(63)
(k)
terminated on a k-port of scattering matrix Sc yields an (n - k )-port of scattering
matrix
I: =Saa +sbaSc(I -SbbSc)- 1Sba (64)
The wave equations of then-port are
Ya= SaaXa + SabXb; Yb= SbaXb + sbbXb (65)

and the terminating condition is
(66)
for the change of sign of ib caused by the interconnection interchanges Xb and
Yb in (20). The elimination of Xb and Yb from (65) and (66) gives Ya= l:xa
where I: is (64). It is, of course, assumed that the reference impedances are
the same for S and Sc at the interconnected ports.
Applications to 2-ports
41. We compute explicitly the entries of Sin the case of a 2-port by using the
first form of (45). One has, successively,
-z12 ]
zu +I
with
~ = (zn + l)(z22 + 1) - z12 z21 (67)

and
2(z22+l) (zn-l)(z22+l)-z12z21
Sn= 1---~--= - - - - - ~ - - - - - -
S12 = 2~2~; ~1=2~1~ (68)

S22 = (zn + l)(z22 -1) - z12 z21
~
Returning to the denormalized entries ZiJ, by (43) one obtains, for instance,
2Z12JR1R2
S12 = - - - - - - ~ - - - - - (69)
(Zn +R1)(Z22 +R2) - Z12 Z21
42. Consider, in particular, the 2-port consisting of a shunt branch Z inserted

between equal terminations R1 = R2 = R. The entries of the impedance
matrix are Zn= Z12 = Z21 = Z22 = Z [see Eq. (4.11)] and (69) reduces to
S12 = (1 + R/2Z)-l (70)
By considering the twisted dual, the transmittance of a series impedance Z
between terminations R is
S12 = (1 + Z/2R)-1 (71)
In particular, if Z is a pure reactancejX, the attenuation and phase-shift are
A12 = ½log ( 1 + X2/4R2); B12 = arc tg X/2R (72)
43. For a lossless 2-port, condition (30), which reduces t!o SS = 12 on the
imaginary axis, yields
Sf1 S11 + St1 S21 = 1
Sf2 S12 + Si2 S22 = 1 (73)
Sf2 S12 + Si1 S22 = 0

the fourth equation being simply the conjugate of the last one. Solving the
last equation for S12 and substituting in the second equation, one obtains
S S* (S21Si1+ 1)= 1
22 22 S S*
11 11
and finally, using the first equation,
S22 Si2 = Su Sf1 (74)
l
Applications to 2-ports 177
From (74) and a comparison of the first two equations (73), one also derives
(75)
Equations (74) and (75) express that the return losses and the transmission losses
are identical in both directions for a lossless (even nonreciprocal) 2-port: A 11 = A22;
A21 = A12 . The only two distinct attenuations are related by Feldtkeller's
relation
e-2Au + e-2A12 = 1 (76)
Because of these results, the last equation (73)' simplifies to
ei(B11-B12) = -ei(B21-B22)
Replacing -1 by ei( 2k+l) n and taking the logarithms, one thus obtains
B11+B22=B21+B12+ (2k+l)1r (77)
In particular, for a reciprocal lossless 2-port, the transmission phase B12 = B21
can be deduced from the return phases.
44. The scattering matrix of a matched 2-port (defined in 33) is
s- [o
- S21
so12] (78)
and its normalized impedance matrix computed by the first expression (46) is
z---- 1 [l
- 1 -S12 S 21
+S12S21
2S22
2S12
1 +S12S21
] (7~
In the reciprocal case, and with the notation S12 = S 21 = s = e-r, the entries
of (79) become
+
1 s2 e2 r
Zn=--=---=coth
1 + r (80)
1 -s2 e2r -1
2s 2 1
Z12=--=---=-- (81)
l - s2 er - e-r sh r
The denormalized impedance matrix deduced from (80-81) by (42) is
z-[
-
R1 coth
JR1R2/sh
r
r
~/shr]
R2 coth r
(82)
45. A matched reciprocal 2-port having a frequency independent attenua-

tion A and no phase-shift is called an attenuator. From conditions (4.45) and
the entries of (82), it appears that the attenuator is realizable as T-network
of positive resistances for
R1 coth A> J R1R2/sh A; R2 coth A > J R1R2/sh A

Assume R1 > R2 (otherwise permute the ports); the most severe of the above
inequalities is the second and simplifies to ch A > fiJi&. The expression
Ao= arc ch JR1/R2 (83)

is, therefore, the minimum matching loss between R1 and R2 without the help of a
transformer. By (4.31), the element values of the T-attenuator are
Za = R1(ch A - JR2/R1)/sh A; Zb = J Ri/R2/sh A

(84)
Zc = R2( ch A - jRJi&) /sh A
In particular, for A= Ao, the elements of the minimum loss attenuator are
Za = R1 th A; Zc=0 (85)
On the other hand, in the case of the symmetric attenuator (R1 = R 2 = R, A
arbitrary) one has
Za = Zc = R th A/2; zb =R/shA (86)
The symmetric attenuator can also be realized as a lattice. The lattice
impedances can be computed by (4.18) or directly obtained by Bartlett's
theorem as
Z1 = Za + 2Zb = R(th A/2 + 1/sh A)= R coth A/2 (87)
Z2 = Za = R th A/2 (88)
46. A reciprocal 2-port is called antimetric with respect to terminations R1 and

R 2 if its scattering matrix between these terminations has zero trace. 4 The
scattering matrix of an antimetric 2-port is of the form
[ Sn S12]
-Sn
(89)
S12
Duality changes the signs of all entries of (89), whereas a polarity reversal of
one port restores the sign of the nondiagonal entries. Both operations com-
bined transform the 2-port in its twisted dual of scattering matrix
[ -Sn S12] (90)

S12 Sn
Since (90) differs from (89) only by a permutation of ports 1 and 2, an anti-
metric 2-port becomes equivalent to its own twisted dual after permutation of its ports.
Let
Zn z12]
[ (91)
z12 z22
Image-parameters 179
be the normalized impedance matrix of an antimetric 2-port. The port

permutation and the polarity reversal at one port change (91) into
-z12] (92)
zu
which must be the impedance matrix of the dual of the original 2-port, that is,
the admittance matrix, inverse of (91), which is
l [
det z -z12
z22 -z12]
zu
(93)
The equality of (92) and (93) expresses det z = I. In terms of the denormal-
ized impedance matrix, this condition becomes
(94)
Finally, a 2-port is antimetric if the determinant cif its impedance (and admittance)
matrix is constant. In the above developments, the antimetric 2-port was
assumed real and operating between real terminations. The results are easily
extended to the complex case.
A 2-port which is simultaneously symmetric and antimetric is matched, for
Su = S22 = -S22 require Su = S22 = 0.
Image-parameters
47. Consider the cascade connection of two matched 2-ports A and B, of
scattering matrices (78) with superscripts A and B, defined with respect to a
common reference resistance at the junction. Since, at the junction, the wave
amplitude outgoing from one 2-port is incoming into the other, the scattering
matrix of the combined 2-port is also of the form (78) with
S12 = sf2sfz (95)
and a cascade cif matched 2-ports is matched.
48. In the definition, in 33, of a matched n-port, real reference resistances
were assumed, so the matching condition between Z and R is Z = R. If the
reference resistance is complex, say W, the conjugate matching condition is
Z=W* (96)
whereas the formal analytic extension of the real matching condition would be
Z=W (97)
Correspondingly, the definition (59) of the scattering matrix with respect to
complex references is not the formal extension of the definitions (43-44) for
real terminations. In the following, we temporarily abandon definitions (96)
and (59) and formally extend relations (97) and (43-44) to complex termina-
tions. All theorems established for the case of real terminations remain
formally true, but their physical interpretation must be discovered since the
concept of conjugate matching related with maximum power transfer is now
abandoned. Moreover, new names must be given the new concepts in order
to avoid confusion with the previous definitions.
49. Whenever (97) holds between two impedances, W and Z are image-
matched. Consider a reciprocal 2-port simultaneously image-matched to W1
and W2 at ports 1 and 2, respectively. With the new convention, its scattering
matrix referred to W1 and W2 is (78), but its parameter s = s12 = S21 is
not the true transmittance and is, therefore, called the image transmittance.
Similarly r =A+ jB = -log S1 2 is replaced by
0= IX +jf3 = - log s (98)
where IX is the image attenuation and f3 the image phase. The impedance matrix of
the 2-port is (82), where R1, R 2 , rare replaced by Wi, W2 , 0, respectively.
This gives
z -[ W1 coth 0 JW1W2/sh 0] (99)
- JW1W2/sh 0 W2 coth 0
The determinant of (99) is W1 W2 , so the diagonal entries of the inverse
admittance matrix are
Yu= coth 0/Wi; (100)
By comparison with the entries of (99) one obtains
Y11Z11 = Y22 Z22 = coth 2 0 (101)
(102)
Conversely, if a 2-port is given, the parameters 0, W1, and W2 can be com-
puted by (101-102) and the 2-port is image-matched to the resulting
impedances W1 and W2, called the image impedances of the 2-port. These
impedances are, however, generally not rational functions of p and hence
nonrealizable.
50. For a symmetric 2-port, one has Jif11 = W2 = W. Moreover, it is easier to

express the image parameters in terms of the lattice impedances (4.18). By
elimination with the entries of (99), one obtains
(103)
and, conversely,
Z1 = W coth 0/2; Z2 = Wth 0/2 (104)
Image-parameters 181
formally extending (87-88). For an antimetric 2-port, (94) and (99) give
W1W2 = R1R2 (105)
so that the image impedances are dual of each other with respect to the
constant resistance (R 1R 2) 112.
51. As an immediate formal extension of 47, the image impedances of a

cascade of 2-ports having identical image impedances on both sides of every
junction are the first and last image impedances. Moreover, the image
transmittance of the cascade is the product of the individual image trans-
mittances, so that the image attenuations and phases add up.
52. We now compute the true scattering matrix~, between terminations R1

and R 2 , of a 2-port of image parameters W1, W2, and 0. The change of
reference from W1, W2 to R1, R2 may be formally simulated by the insertion
of transformers of ratios
(i = l, 2) (106)
provided one extends the equations (l.13-1.15) of real transformers to the
complex ratios (106) instead of using the true equations (4.40). One then
obtains~ by (62), with
N = diag{n1, n2}
and with N also replaced by N, whereas Sis the formal scattering matrix (78)
referred to the image impedances. From the equivalent form
~ = [N-1 - N + (N-l + N)S][N-l + N + (N-l - N)SJ-1
one finally obtains
p2s 2
~ = (l - p1p2s2)- 1 [ PI - (107)
TIT2S
where
l -nt (108)
Pi= l +n;
53. By comparison with (55), it appears that pi is the reflectance from W1 to
.R1, whereas rt is the corresponding transmittance
(109)
also called mismatch factor between W, and Rt . In the expression

~12 = r1r2 sk; (110)
contained in (107), the true transmittance appears as the product of the

image transmittance by the mismatch factors at both ports corrected by an
interaction factor k (which is 1 if image matching occurs, be it at one port
only). If the expansion
k =I+ p1p2 s 2 + (p1p2 s 2) 2 + · · ·

is convergent, the interaction can be interpreted as arising from successive
reflections, since a term p 1 p 2 s2 represents the total go-and-return transmit-
tance of a signal circulating in the 2-port between the true terminations.
54. From the expression

p1 -p2s 2
l:u=---- ( 111)
1 -p1p2s 2
contained in (107), one may compute the input impedance Za of the 2-port
terminated on R2 at the other end by applying (10) which becomes in this
case
Z a-R 1 +l:11
- 1
1 -l:11
From the values (108, 106) and withs= e- 0, one then obtains
W2 +R2 coth0
Za = W1 - - - - - - (112)
R2 + W2 coth0
The reflectance with respect to W1 (computed as if W1 were real) takes the
simple form
(113)
chapter 7
Positive matrices and bounded matrices
Properties of positive matrices
I. In 3.18, a rational matrix Z was defined as a positive matrix if Z Z +

were everywhere positive definite in Rep > 0, that is, if the hermitian form
+
x(Z Z)x were positive in Rep> 0 for all vectors x. Consider the scalar
function
(1)
Since its real part is ,+ '* +

= x( Z Z)x, function (I) is positive. Conversely,
stating that (I) is a positive function for all x is equivalent to stating that Z
is a positive matrix. In 3.19, Z is defined as skew para-hermitian if it satisfies
Z + ~ = 0 everywhere; since , + {* = .x( Z + Z)x, { is then para-odd in
accordance with the definition of 5.1. To conclude: Z is a positive (skew
para-hermitian) matrix ijf (I) is a positive (para-odd) function for all vectors x. In
the case of a symmetric positive matrix, the vectors x in the above theorem
can be restricted to be real: since Z + Z = R is then real symmetric, the
+ +
notation x =a+ jb gives xRx = a'Ra b'Rb j(a'Rb - b'Ra), and the
imaginary terms cancel since a scalar is its own transpose; a' Ra and b' Rb
are then arbitrary representatives of x' Rx with x real.
2. Since positive definiteness is invariant by congruence, NZN is a positive

(skew para-hermitian) matrix with Z, N being an arbitrary constant matrix.
Moreover, if N is real, N'ZN is a positive real (symmetric, skew para-hermitian)
matrix with Z.
183
184 7. Positive matrices and bounded matrices
3. The sum ef two positive (real, symmetric, skew para-hermitian) matrices is

positive (real, symmetric, skew para-hermitian). This extends theorem 5.66 to
matrices.
4. By definition, a matrix Z(p) whose entries are rational fractions in p has

a pole at p 0 if some entry Z1,1 (p) has a pole at Po . The order of the pole of Z
at Po is the largest among the orders of the poles of the entries. A matrix is
anarytic in a region of the p-plane if all its entries are analytic in that region.
In particular, in accordance with 6.16, a matrix is hurwitzian if all its entries
are hurwitzian functions (analytic in Re p > 0). By (1), poles of Z corre-
spond to identical poles with the same orders of{, and conversely, for general
vectors x. From 5.9 applied to t it then results that a positive matrix is anarytic
in Rep> 0, and that, on the imaginary axis, it may onry have simple poles. Let H
be the residue matrix of Z at the pole jwo (the entries of this matrix are the
residues of the entries of Z); the corresponding residue of ( 1) is xHx and must
be real and positive for all x; this expresses that H is hermitian positive
definite, so that the residue matrix ef a positive matrix at every pole on the imaginary
axis is hermitian positive defi,nite.
5. If Z is anarytic in Re p > 0 and if Z + Z is positive definite on the imaginary

axis, Z is a positive matrix. This is directly deduced from the similar scalar
theorem of 5.10 on ( 1). By analogy with 5.11, if Z has poles on the imaginary
axis at jw1, and infinity; with residue matrices Ht and Hoo, the difference
H,
Z1(P) = Z(p) - Ii - .--
P-1w,
Hoop (2)
satisfies the hypothesis of _the above theorem, for the subtracted terms in
(2) are skew para-hermitian (so Z1 + Z1 = Z + Z on the imaginary axis),
and Z1 is a positive matrix. If Z(p) is a real matrix, Hoo is real (since Hoop
is the principal value at infinity), and the remaining poles occur in conju-
gate pairs with conjugate residue matrices, except possibly for an isolated
pole at p = 0 with a real residue matrix Ho; this shows the total subtracted
matrix in (2) is real. Finally, if Z(p) is symmetric, so are all residue matrices
and thus the total subtracted term. We have thus proved the following set
of theorems : a positive (real, symmetric, skew-para-hermitian) matrix remains
positive (real, symmetric, skew para-hermitian) after extraction ef its poles on the
imaginary axis.
6. All the poles ef a positive skew para-hermitian matrix are concentrated on the
imaginary axis; this results immediately from the definition, or from the
similar scalar theorem 5.13 on the positive para-odd function (1). After the
Reduction of singular matrices 185
extraction of all poles by (2), the remainder Z1 is a matrix without poles,

even at infinity, thus a constant matrix, thus skew-hermitian. As a consequence,
a positive skew para-hermitian matrix is of theform
Ht
Z(p) =I-.-+
P-JWt
Hoop+ Ko (3)
where H, and Hoo are positive definite hermitian and where Ko is skew-hermitian.
7. If Z is, in addition, real, Hoo and Ho are real hermitian, thus symmetric,
whereas Ko is real and skew-hermitian, thus simply skew. On the other hand,
the conjugate terms are grouped into
H H~ pReH-w-ImH
--·-+--'-=2 ...
p + jwi p + jwi p2 + wl
With a slight change of notation and with the terminology of 3.20, a positive
para-skew matrix is of the form
H-w-K- H0
Z(p) = Li P p2' +w~' •+Hoop +-+K
p o
(4)
where all Ht, Hoo and Ho are real symmetric, all Kt and Ko real skew; moreover,
+
the matrices Ho, Hoo, and H, jKt are positive definite. Note that the positive
+
definiteness of Ht jKt is more severe than the one of Ht alone, and that
the latter is not sufficient.
8. If, in addition, Z is symmetric, all Kt and Ko vanish. A positive symmetric

para-skew matrix is called a Foster matrix, by analogy with a term introduced
in 5.1 in the scalar case. To conclude: a Foster matrix is of the form
H0 H
Z(p) = p + p L p2 +•w~ +Hoop (5)
where all Ht, Hoo, and Ho are real symmetric positive d~finite.
9. If Z is a positive matrix and Zo a constant matrix, Z1 = Z - Zo is a positive

matrix if Z1 +Z1 is positive definite on the imaginary axis. This results, by ( 1),
from the similar scalar theorem 5.15.

10. If a positive matrix Z(p) is singular, of local rank r < n, at some point p 0 in
Re p > 0 (not on the j-axis), it is of the form
Z = N(W+ On-r)N (6)
where N is a constant matrix and W(p) a positive matrix ef dimension and normal
rank r. Some n - r columns of Zo = Z(p 0 ) are linear combinations, with
constant coefficients, of the remaining r columns. By a symmetric relabeling,
the r independent columns may be brought to the left of the matrix which
is partitioned
(r) (n -r)
Zo= [Zaa Zab] (r)
Zba Zbb (n -r)
The relations of linear dependence are then
Zab= ZaaC; (at Po) (7)
where C is some constant matrix of dimensions r · (n - r). From (7), one
deduces Zo X = 0 with
X = [ _(n_r]
For any column vector Xi of X one has Zo Xi = 0, hence Xi Zo Xi = 0, so the
positive function , = Xi Zxi vanishes at Po, thus everywhere, by 5.7, since
Re p0 > 0. Combining these results for all columns Xi of X, one obtains
xzx = CZaaC -CZab - ZbaC + zbb = 0 (forallp) (8)
Consider the constant nonsingular matrix
Owing to (8), the transform M = TZT reduces to
with
A= ZaaC- Zab; B=CZaa-Zba (9)
Since, by 2, M is a positive matrix with Z, the matrix
M +M = [Zaa + Zaa
B+A
must be positive definite in Rep > 0. By A.40, one must then have
A=-B (10)
everywhere in Re p > 0, thus for all p. Since A and B defined by (9) are
hurwitzian with Z(p), (10) is only possible if A and B have poles only on
the imaginary axis. Any such pole jwi is an imaginary pole of the positive
matrix Mand is, therefore, simple with a hermitian residue matrix. Denoting
by Ai and Bi the residue matrices of A and B at jwt, one thus has At = Bt,
whereas condition (10) in the neighborhood of jwt requires At= -B,.
Consequently, At= Et= 0, A and B have no poles whatsoever and are
constant matrices. But the first equation (7) expresses that A vanishes at
Po, so that one has A = B = 0, thus Zba = CZaa, whereas (9) reduces to
( 11)
so both relations (7) hold everywhere. Inverting the transformation defining

M, where A= B = 0, one obtains (6) with W = Zaa, N = T- 1 . Finally,
Wis a positive matrix as a submatrix of Z, and is clearly of normal rank r.
In (6), the last n - r rows of N can be omitted, since they are only multiplied
by zero submatrices, and N thus reduces to an (r · n)-matrix. Actually, the
relations (8) and ( 11) give immediately
Zaa
z-- [ CZaa ZaaC] [lr]
CZaaC = C Zaa[Ir, C] (12)
11. Theorem 10 states that a positive matrix cannot be locally singular in

Rep> 0 without being identically singular. For an identically singular
positive matrix of normal rank r, the form ( 16) is obtained a fortiori, and
Wis not identically singular, otherwise a further reduction would be possible.
Consequently, the rank of a positive matrix is invariant in Rep> 0.
12. An n-port having an impedance (admittance) matrix but no inverse

matrix is called admittance (impedance) degenerate. Doubly degenerate n-ports
having neither matrix will be considered in the next section. Owing to
theorem 10, however, the synthesis of a simply degenerate passive n-port of immit-
tance matrix Z having a normal rank r is reduced to the synthesis of the nondegenerate
passive n-port of immittance matrix Zaa; if Zaa is realizable, the n-port of matrix
Z is obtained by closing on Zaa the (possibly complex) transformer (n r)- +
port of ratio matrix [l r, C] in accordance with the first theorem 4.8 which
has been extended to complex transformations in 4.39. It is important,
furthermore, to prove that reality, reciprocity, and losslessness are invariant in
the reduction process. If Z is a real matrix, C defined in (7) is a real constant
matrix, and Zaa is a positive real matrix as submatrix of Z. If Z is symmetric,
one has Zba = Z~b = C'Zaa by (7), and a comparison with the relation
Zba = CZaa imposed by B = 0 gives C = C', so that C is again real, and Zaa
is symmetric with Z. As for losslessness, its invariance results from the fact
that Z + ~ is the transform of the direct sum of Zaa + ~aa with a zero-
matrix.
13. We next prove that the reduction described in 10 can be made by a unitary
traniformation, thus, in particular, by an orthogonal traniformation in the case
where C is real. By A.51, there exists a unitary matrix U such that P = UN
is upper triangular. From (6) and the unitarity of U, one deduces
Z= UP(W+ On-r)PU ( 13)
Since Pis upper triangular, the zeros in the last n - r columns are preserved
in P( W + 0n-r )P, and the unitary reduction is thus accomplished by U.
14. Consider the decomposition (A.37) of a positive matrix Z into its

hermitian and skew-hermitian parts Rand Q, with
R= ( z + Z) /2; Q= ( z- Z) /2 (14)
If R is singular, of local rank r < n, at some point Po in Rep> 0, Z - Qo, where
Qo = Q(Po) is a positive matrix of normal rank r, which can thus be reduced by
theorem IO to yield
+
Z - Qo = N(W 0n-r)N (15)
The theorem is a trivial consequence of 9, since Z - Qo is a positive matrix
with Z for any constant skew-hermitian Qo, for Qo does not contribute to
the hermitian part of Z - Qo.
15. If Z is a positive matrix, the rank of Z+ Z is invariant in Rep> 0 and does

not exceed the invariant rank of Z. With the notations (14), if R is singular, (15)
+
holds and gives, since Qo Qo = 0,
z + z= + W) +0n-r] N
N[ ( w ( 16)
The reduction can be pursued unless W + W is nonsingular everywhere in
Re p > 0. On the other hand, if Z itself is degenerate, (6), hence (16),
holds everywhere with N nonsingular in Rep > 0, hence rank ( W + W) ::;;
rank W.
On the imaginary axis, both rank Z and rank ( Z + Z) may decrease
locally, but one still has
+
rank ( Z Z) ::;; rank Z (17)
at every pointjwo. This is proved by freezing Z atjwo in order to produce
a constant positive matrix to which the previous theorem applies.
16. Since the entries, hence the minors, of Z + ? are rational functions of p,
the rank of Z + Z is equal to its normal rank, except possibly at some isolated
points. On the other hand, the entries of Z + Z are not analytic functions
of the complex variable p = cx +jw (but of cx and w separately), so its rank
Bounded matrices 189
may fall below its invariant rank in Re p > 0 on the entire imaginary axis
where Z + Zand Z + Z coincide. Consequently, the normal rank of Z + Z
is not larger than the n;rmal rank of Z + Z. Combining this with the result
of 14, one has the following inequalities for the normal ranks.
rank ( Z + ~) :s;; rank ( Z + Z) < rank Z (18)
Locally, however, 15 gives

rank ( Z + Z) < rank Zin Rep > 0 (19)
but stronger results do not hold.
17. Since Z reduces to Z' on the real p-axis, and since rank (Z + Z) is
invariant in Re p > 0, this invariant rank is rank ( Z + Z') on the positive
real p-axis. For a reciprocal n-port, one thus has rank (Z + .Z) = rank Zin
Re p ;:::: 0. On the other hand, the second inequality ( 18) may be strict for
nonreciprocal n-ports, as shown by the example of the gyrator where Z has
rank 2 and Z + Z rank 0.
Bounded matrices
18. The concepts of bounded and para-unitary matrices were introduced
in 6.12 and 6.14 and the similar scalar concepts in 6.4 and 6.5. The relations
between bounded (para-unitary) and positive (para-odd) functions based
on the transformations (6.9-10) were established in 6.4, and we now extend
these results to the matrix case, basing our study on the similar relations
(6.44) and (6.46).
19. If z is a positive (real, symmetric, skew para-hermitian) matrix, S defi,ned by

(6.44) is a bounded (real, symmetric, para-unitary) matrix. The theorems result
directly from the definitions, from the matrix relations
S-S' = 2(z' + ln)-1(z -z')(z + ln)-1 (20)

In -SS = 2(z + ln)-1(z + z)(z + ln)-1 (21)
deduced from (6.44), and from (21) written with lower tildes. Conversely,
if S is a bounded (real, .rymmetric, para-unitary) matrix and if z defi,ned by (6.46)
exists, it is a positive (real, symmetric, skew para-hermitian) matrix. This results
from the converse relations
z - z' = 2(In -S')-1(S -S')(ln -S)-1 (22)
z + z = 2(In -S)-1(ln -SS)(In -S)-1 (23)

20. If z is a positive (real, ... ) matrix, z-1, if it exists, is also a positive (real, ... )
matrix. By (6.44-46) the interchange of z and z- 1 corresponds to the inter-
change of Sand -S, which are simultaneously bounded (real, ... ). More
generally, if some hybrid matrix of an n-port is a positive matrix, so are all
other hybrid matrices which exist: by 6.26, a change of description (permu-
tation of some currents and voltages) can be simulated by the insertion of
gyrators, and this changes S into 0S, bounded with S.
21. If an n-port has a (real) scattering matrix referred to separate positive (real)
terminations, it has at least one (real) hybrid matrix. The theorem equivalently
states that there exists some diagonal matrix 0 of entries ± 1, such that 0S
has an impedance matrix. By 6.25, the impedance matrix exists if
det (1 n - 0S) cfa 0, that is, is some 0 exists such that det (S - 0) cfa 0, and
this will be proved by recurrence on the matrix dimension n. For n = 1, the
theorem is trivial: a one-port has an impedance or an admittance. On the
other hand, the Laplace expansion of det (S - 0) based on the first row is
(Sn - 01)~11 + S12 ~12 + ··· + Sin ~ln (24)
where the minors ~lk do not depend on 02, ... , 0n. If one had det (S - 0)
= 0 for all 0, one could write that (24) is zero with 01 = I on one hand, and
0 1 = -1 on the other, the other 0k remaining identical. The sum of the
resulting equations is ~11 = 0 which expresses det (S - 0) = 0 for a sub-
matrix of dimension n - 1, and this would again hold for all 0.
22. If Sis a bounded (real, symmetric) matrix, In± Sare positive (real, symmetric)
matrices. This results from
(In± S) + (In ±S) =(In± S)(In ± S) + (In -SS) (25)
where the first term of the right-hand member is positive definite by A.33.
Consequently, the ranks
a = rank (1 n + S) ; ~ = rank (In - S) (26)
are invariant in Rep> 0, owing to 11.
23. A hurwitzian matrix S, such that In - SS is positive definite on Re p = 0, is

bounded. Assume first that M = 1n - S is not identically singular. By (25)
and 5, Mis then a positive matrix, and so is 2M- 1, by 20. By 9, z = 2M-l
- In, identical to (6.46), is also a positive matrix, since z + z, which is
(23), is positive definite on the j-axis as a conjunctive transform of In - SS.
Finally, Sis bounded owing to 19. If Mis singular, apply the above proof
to S1 = 0S with 0 chosen, as in 21, to produce a new nonsingular M 1, and
note that In -S1S1 = In -SS.
Bounded matrices 191
24. If S is a bounded (symmetric, para-unitary) matrix such that both ranks (26)
are <n, it can be reduced, by a constant unitary transformation, to a direct sum
I:+ l n-P + (-1 n-a) (27)
where ~ is bounded (symmetric, para-unitary) of dimension
ex+/3-n (28)
Moreover, if S is real, the transformation is real orthogonal. Apply the unitary
+
reduction of 13 to l n S which is a positive matrix by 22. The matrix is
reduced to M + On-a where M is a positive matrix of dimension ex. Since
the transformation is unitary, it also reduces S to (M - la)+ (-ln-a) =
S1 + ( -1 n-a)- Since l n -SS is positive definite in Rep> 0, so is la -S1S1,
so that S1 is bounded. Since l n - S, reduced to (la - S1) + 2(1 n-a) has
rank (3, l - S1 has rank (28) and is a positive matrix by 22. Now apply 13
to la - S1 to obtain N + On-P where N is a positive matrix of dimension
(28). This reduces S 1 to ~ + l n-P, where ~ is again bounded. Finally, S
has been reduced to (27) by the product of the transformation matrices at
the two steps, and this product is unitary. As in 12, reality, reciprocity, and
losslessness are invariant in the reduction process. The unitary transforma-
tion is real, thus orthogonal in the first two cases, and transforms S - S' into
~ - ~, augmented by a zero matrix. As regards losslessness, it is sufficient
to note that para-unitarity is invariant with respect to a unitary transfor-
mation.
25. Then-port of scattering matrix (27) is the (ex+ (3 - n)-port of scattering

matrix ~ completed by n - (3 separate open circuits and n - ex separate
short circuits. The above theorem extends the results of 12 to doubly degen-
erate n-ports, for the n-port of scattering matrix S has neither an impedance
nor an admittance matrix if ex< n, (3 < n, due to (6.46) and (6.50). Conse-
quently, the synthesis cif a doubly degenerate passive n-port cif bounded scattering
+
matrix S is reduced to the synthesis cif the nondegenerate passive (ex (3 - n )-port
cif bounded scattering matrix ~; the n-port S is obtained by closing on the
(ex+ (3 - n)-port ~ a (real) transformer (ex+ (3)-port deduced from the 2n-
port corresponding to the unitary (orthogonal) transformation matrix
combined with the open and short circuits. Note that in the proof of the
last theorem, the ex-port of scattering matrix S1 obtained in the intermediate
step is only simple degenerate, for it has an admittance matrix since S1 +
1a= M is nonsingular. One could obviously have interchanged the order
of the two steps of the reduction process, thus producing an intermediate
(3-port having an impedance, but no admittance matrix.
26. In 24, the rank of l n - SS is the one of Im - f ~, which does not exceed
its dimension m given by (28), and a similar property holds for matrices
written with lower tildes. One can thus discuss the case where Z exists and
relate the ranks by (21) and (23). The right-hand sides of both expressions
are conjunctive transforms, and one has
rank (1 -SS) = rank (Z + Z) (29)

On the other hand, the right-hand sides of (21) and (23) are not conjunctive
transforms when written with lower tildes. Consequently, (21) gives rank
( 1 -§S) < rank ( Z + +
f) and (23) gives rank ( Z f) ~ rank ( 1 - §S) only
if the various matrices in the right-hand sides exist and are finite. This is
true almost everywhere, so one has
normal rank ( 1 - §S) = normal rank ( Z + f) (30)
but the equality does not hold locally. In any case, all the above results
combined give
normal rank ( 1 - §.S) ~ normal rank ( 1 - SS) < oc + /3 - n (31)
The fact that the analogue of (30) does not hold locally is shown by
the scalar example s = kg*/g similar to (6.15) which defines a bounded
function for j k I < 1. Fork real, one then has 1 - s*s = 1 - k2 and, by (6.10)
(32)
In this example (32) vanishes at a zero of g or g*, whereas 1 - s*s does not.
Note, finally, that the ranks involved in (30) are independent of the
reference impedances with respect to which S is defined, even for complex
normalizations, for a change of reference corresponds, by 6.37, to the replace-
ment of Z by N(Z - Qt)N with N constant nonsingular and Qt constant
skew-hermitian, and such a replacement does not alter the ranks of Z + ?
and z+z.
27. Let S be the scattering matrix of a lossless n-port. If its last k ports are
closed on their reference resistances, the resulting (n - k)-port has the
scattering matrix Saa defined by the partition (6.63), as established in 6.10.
Since Sis para-unitary, one has, in particular,
(33)
and the rank of 1n-k - §aa Saa= §ba Sba does not exceed k. This proves that
the normal rank of In - SS does not exceed the number of resistances contained in
n-port of matrix S. The pr7iof is independent of the resistance values, owing to
the invariance mentioned in 26. By (21), one deduces, in particular, that
the realization of a passive n-port of immittance matrix Z requires a number of
+
resistances equal at least to the normal rank of Z ?·
Synthesis by conjunctive transformations 193
28. The normal ranks of S - S' and S - S * are also of interest, although the
local ranks of these matrices may fall below their normal ranks anywhere in
the p-plane. Moreover, these ranks are insensitive only to a change of termi-
nations defined by a real matrix Nin (6.62), as is easily checked by computing
~ - ~, and ~ - ~* in that case. Also, if Z exists, one has normal rank
(S - S ') = normal rank ( Z - Z ') by (20), and a similar identity holds when
transposes are replaced by conjugates. For a real degenerate n-port, N is real
in (6), and rank (Z - Z') = rank (W - W') ~ rank W = rank Z, and also
rank (Z - Z*) ~ rank Z. For doubly degenerate n-ports, the reduction pro-
cess based on S establishes similarly that both the ranks ef S - S' and of S - S *
+
cannot exceed cc fJ - n, if Sis bounded real. The physical interpretation of these
ranks results from the next theorems.
Consider the expression (6.64) giving the scattering matrix ~ of an
n-port of scattering matrix (6.63) terminated on a k-port of scattering matrix
Sc. If the n-port is reciprocal, the submatrices Saa and Sbb are symmetric,
and one has Sba = Sab. One then obtains
so that the normal rank of ~ - ~ ' does not exceed the normal rank of
Sc - S~. Consider in particular the case where k is even and where the k-port
consists of k/2 separate gyrators, so that Sc is a direct sum of k/2 blocks (6.47)
and the rank of Sc - S~ is k. This proves that the half-rank ef S - S' (necessarily
an integer) does not exceed the number ef gyrators contained in then-port of matrix S
normalized with respect to real resistances. In particular, the realization of a passive
n-port ef immittance matrix Z requires a number ef gyrators at least equal to the one
half the normal rank of Z - Z '. Similarly one proves that the normal rank of
S - S * does not exceed the number of imaginary resistances contained in the n-port
ef matrix S normalized to real resistances.
Synthesis by conjunctive transformations

29. The congruence transformation of an immittance matrix received a
simple network interpretation in 4.8 and this was extended in 4.39 to con-
junctive transformations. In 30-32, we apply these methods to obtain the
synthesis of all constant passive n-ports. In 33-36 we apply the same diag-
onalization procedure to every residue matrix Ht of a skew para-hermitian
matrix (3) and thus obtain the synthesis of all lossless n-ports. Owing to the
reduction theorems 12 and 25, it is sufficient to deal with nondegenerate
n-ports, and we therefore assume that the impedance matrix Z is prescribed
in all cases. The minimum number of reactive elements, and the total
number of elements in the realization, will be discussed in Chap. 8.
30. We treat first the case where Z is a constant complex matrix and we separate
it into its hermitian part R and skew-hermitian part Q as in ( 14). Set further
Q = jX, where X is hermitian. The hermitian part R, which is positive
definite, is reduced by a conjunctive transformation to a real positive diagonal
matrix, so that the n-port of impedance matrix R is realized as a complex
transformer network closed on separate positive resistances. Similarly, jX is
realized as a complex transformer network closed on separate imaginary
resistances. The n-port Z = R + jX is obtained as a series combination of
its lossy part and its lossless part. Since a complex transformer network is
realizable with real transformers, gyrators and imaginary resistances by 4.38,
a,ry constant passive n-port is realizable with real ideal transformers, positive resis-
tances, imaginary resistances, and gyrators.
If R is strictly positive definite, a simultaneous diagonalization of R and
Xis possible by A.62, and the realization is then a single complex transformer
2n-port whose output ports are each closed on a positive resistance in series
with an imaginary resistance.
31. If Z is symmetric, R is real and Q purely imaginary, so X is again real.

Since R and X are thus both real symmetric, the above congruence transfor-
mations are both real. Consequently, any constant passive reciprocal n-port is
realizable with real ideal transformers, positive resistances, and imaginary resistances.
32. If Z is real, R is real symmetric and Q real skew. The matrix R, which is
positive definite, is realized as above, On the other hand, the real skew
matrix Q can be reduced by a real congruence transformation to the direct
sum of diagonal blocks of dimension 2 (each skew), by A.44, and each block
is the impedance matrix of a gyrator. Consequently, a,ry constant real passive
n-port is realizable with real ideal transformers, positive resistances, and gyrators. The
number of resistances in this realization is the rank of R, and the number of
gyrators is the half-rank ofQ. Since Z + Z' and Z - Z' reduce, respectively,
to 2R and 2Q when Z is real and constant, these numbers are minimal, in
accordance with theorems 27 and 28. If R is strictly positive definite, the
reduction of Rand Q can be done simultaneously by A.67.
If Z is real symmetric, it reduces to R alone, which is real symmetric, and
the synthesis is the one of 4.9. On the other hand, if Z is lossless, one has
R = 0 everywhere in the preceding discussion, and real resistances disappear
in the realizations.
33. A general lossless impedance matrix is of the form (3). A positive definite
hermitian matrix Hi is of the form Ni ~i Ni, where ~i is real positive diagonal,
so that each term Hif (p - }wi) of (3) is realized as a complex transformer
of ratio matrix Ni closed on separate impedances of the form o/(p - }wi),
'
L
Synthesis by conjunctive transformations 195
which represent a capacitance 1/o in parallel with an imaginary resistance

jo/wt as in 5.17. Similarly, Hoop is reduced to a diagonal matrix tl. 00 p realized
as separate inductances. Finally, Ko is of the form Q which has been realized
in 32. Since inductances can be replaced by capacitances and gyrators, any
lossless n-port is realizable with real ideal tran.iformers, imaginary resistances, gyrators,
and positive capacitances.
34. If Z is symmetric, each of the matrices in (3) is symmetric, and the diagonal-
ization only involves real ideal transformers. Consequently, any lossless recipro-
cal n-port is realizable with real ideal tran.iformers, imaginary resistances, and positive
capacitances. Inductances are redundant, owing to 4.34.
35. If Z is real, it is of the form (4). The term Ko is realized by real trans-
formers and gyrators, as in 32. In the term H00 p, H00 is real symmetric and is
reduced by congruence transformation to a positive diagonal matrix, and the
corresponding partial n-port is a real transformer network closed on positive
inductances. Similarly, Ho/P is the impedance matrix of a real transformer
network closed on positive capacitances. Finally, each term under the sum-
mation sign originates from two conjugate terms of (3). Let Ht= Nt D.t N, be
the diagonal reduction of each positive definite hermitian matrix, and let
N, = At +jBt. A typical combination of two complex conjugate terms is2
(Ai - jBD!l.i_(Ai + jBi) + (Ai+ jBD!l.i_(Ai - jBi)

P-Jwi P +Jwi
= 2[p(Aitl.iAi +B;tl.iBi) + wt(B;tl.iAi -A;tl.iBi)]/(p 2 + w;)
2 [A' B'] [ ptl.i (35)
= p2 + w; i ' i wi !).i
and the corresponding impedance matrix is realized as a real transformer
3n-port of ratio matrix
[~:]
closed on a 2n-port of impedance matrix
(36)
Since D.t is diagonal, a symmetric relabeling of (36) is the direct sum of n

diagonal blocks of the form
(37)
where St; represents the jth diagonal entry of the matrix lit. If St;= 0, (37)
vanishes and is realized as two short circuits. For St; =f= 0 (thus positive), the
inverse admittance matrix is
wi] wi [
p = 2si - 1
0
I
I] + 2sip [Io
o 1
(38)
The first term is the admittance matrix of a gyrator, whereas the second
matrix corresponds to two separate positive capacitances; consequently, (37)
is the admittance matrix of a gyrator whose ports are shunted by separate
capacitances. Finally, one can replace all inductances by combinations of
gyrators and capacitances and any real lossless n-port is realizable by real ideal
transformers, gyrators, and positive capacitances.
J
36. If Z is real and symmetric, it is of the form (5). Each real symmetric matrix
i Ht is of the form N; lit Nt where lit is positive diagonal, so the partial matrix
pHtf (p 2 + wf) can be realized as a real transformer network of matrix Nt
'I
closed on separate antiresonant circuits of impedances St;P/(p 2 + wf). The

terms Hoop and Ho/P have been realized in 35. Finally, a,ry real lossless reciprocal
n-port is realizable with real transformers and positive inductances and capacitances.
Circulators 3
37. The scattering matrix of a matched 3-port is of the form
(39)
For a lossless 3-port, (39) is unitary on the imaginary axis, and this gives the
conditions
+
s;1 S21 s:1 Sa1 = 1 (40)
S:'2 S12 + s: S32 =

2 I (41)
S:'3S13 + St3S23 = 1 (42)
St1 Sa2 = 0 (43)
s;1s23 = o (44)
S:'2 S13 =0 (45)
It is clear that not all entries StJ ( i =f= j) are zero, otherwise (40---42) would be
violated. Assume, for instance, S13 =/= 0; renumber the ports to meet that
assumption. By (45) one has S12 = 0. Then, by (41), St2S32 = 1; thus
S32 =/= 0. Then, by (43), S31 = 0, and by (40), S21 =/= 0 and finally, by (44),
1
I
Circulators 197
S23 = 0. In conclusion, one has S12 = S23 = Ss1 = 0 in (39) while each of the
remaining elements has unit modulus. Since such a matrix cannot be sym-
metric, a reciprocal lossless 3-port (even complex) cannot be matched (even at a
single frequency).
38. In the particular case of a constant real 3-port, the conditions /Sii/ 2 = I
on the nonzero entries require Sij = ± I. By multiplying row and column I '
of the matrix by S21 (this merely changes the polarity of port 1 if S21 is -1),
one makes S21 = 1 and replaces S13 by S13S21. Similarly, by multiplying
row and column 3 by Ss2, one makes Ss2 = 1 and replaces S13 S2 1 by
(46)
so that the matrix becomes
S~ [! 0
0
~] (47)
withs= ±1.
For s = I, (4 7) is a permutation matrix shifting the ports in the order 1 2 3
by one step, because Eqs. (6.24) become
y2 =x1; ys =x2; Y1=X3 (48)
The 3-port of scattering matrix (4 7) is, therefore, called a circulator and is

symbolically represented as in Fig. I. It is easily checked that <let (ln - S) =
0, so the circulator has no impedance matrix. By the first expression (6.50),
the normalized admittance matrix is
0 (49)
-1
The sum of the rows of (49) vanishes, so the corresponding admittance
equation gives i1 + i2 +is= 0 and expresses that the ports have a common
node and are all symmetrically oriented, for instance away from this node,
2
,-
1
Fm. 7.1 Fm. 7.2

which means that terminals l' 2' 3' coincide. The network of admittance
matrix (49) is thus of the form shown in Fig. 2, and it remains for us to
realize the 3-terminal network of terminals 1, 2, 3. By calling a the port of
terminals ( 1, 3) and b the port of terminals (2, 3), one has Va = v1 - va,
Vb = v2 - va, ia = i1, ib = i2. On the other hand, the first two admittance
+
equations resulting from (49) are i1 = v2 - va, i2 = v1 va, thus ia =Vb,
ib = -va and they show that the 2-port is a gyrator of ratio 1 from a to b.
Finally, the 3-port of Fig. 3 is a realization of the circulator of Fig. I for unit
terminations.
Consider next the matrix (4 7) with e = -1. By changing S into -S,
that is, by taking the dual 3-port, one produces a circulator matrix with
S21 = Sa2 = -1, Sia = 1. By proceeding as above (changing polarities of
I ports 1 and 3), one comes to (47) with e = 1. Consequently, the 3-port of
I
I
I scattering matrix (4 7) with e = -1 is the dual of the circular of Fig. 3 with
,I
I polarities at ports 1 and 3 reversed. Constructing the dual by the method of
I
2.46 and noting that a gyrator of unit ratio is its own dual since its normalized
•I impedance and admittance matrices are identical, one obtains the 3-port of
' Fig. 4.
3' 3
1 2
2
1
1'n------ 2' 0
FIG. 7.3 Fm. 7.4
39. An n-port is called a circulator if its scattering matrix with respect to equal
separate positive resistances is a cyclic permutation matrix with possible
polarity reversals. As in 38 for the 3-port case, one can reduce, by a suitable
numbering of the ports and a suitable choice of port polarities, the permuta-
tion matrix to the form
0 0 0 0 0 B
1 0 0 0 0 0
S= 0 1 0 0 0 0
(50)
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
Circulators 199
with e = ± I. By computing det (In ± S) by the La place expansion on the

first row (only two minors of dimension n - l are involved and are both
triangular with diagonal entries equal to ±I) one obtains
det (In± S) = I - (=f l)ne (51)
On the other hand, both matrices In ± S have at least rank n - I, for their
upper left-hand corner submatrices are triangular with unit diagonal
entries. From this and the case where (51) vanishes, the following values of
the ranks (26) result:
e =+I: cx=n-1; fJ=n-1
n even {
e= -1: ex= n f3 = n
(52)
e =+I: ex= n fJ=n-1
n odd {
B= -1: cx=n-1; fJ=n
Consequently, one has
n-2 for n even and e = +I
cx+fJ-n= ( n for n even and e = -1 (53)
n-1 for n odd
Since a permutation matrix is orthogonal, a circulator is real and lossless and
thus realizable with real transformers and gyrators. After reducing the de-
generacies by the method of 25, one obtains an (ex+ f3 - n)-port which is
still real lossless, which has an impedance matrix which is therefore real skew,
so that Z = -Z' and the ranks of Zand Z - Z' coincide. Consequently,
by 28, the number of gyrators required in the realization is one-half of (53).
The realization for e = -1 is deduced from the one for e = +
I by cascading
one gyrator at port n, and this corresponds to the change from n - 2 ton in
(53) for n even. Further discussion is therefore limited to the case e = +I,
which is more economical in gyrators for n even.
40. The case n = 3 has been treated in 38. For n = 4, the equations (6.29)
are
VI - = i1 + i4
V4
-v1 +v2 = i1 + i2
(54)
-Vz + V3 = i2 + ia
-va + v4 = is + i4
From (54) one deduces

and this shows that the ports must form a closed loop, with polarities of ports
2 and 4 reversed, as shown in dotted lines in Fig. 5 (although the order of the
V+
--~---
i1 .
1'2'
--~--
.
3•4· 13 2.3
Fm. 7.5
ports in the loops is not specified, it is natural to try the cyclic order). The
eight terminals 1, l ', ... , 4, 4' reduce to four distinct terminals a, b, c, d, and
it remains to realize a 4-terminal network. The topological constraints intro-
duced by the structure of Fig. 5 are
i1 +i2 = -ib;
i2 +i3 = ic;
i3 +i4 = -ia; V3 =Ve-Va
i4 +i1 = ia;
By eliminating the port variables from these equations and (54), one obtains
(55)
(56)
The relations (55) show that the 4-terminal network is a true 2-port of input
port (a, c) and output port (b, d). The relations (56) prove that this 2-port
is a gyrator of ratio 1. The resulting 4-port circulator is shown in Fig. 6.
41. Consider the interconnection of circulators of Fig. 7 where each symbol

represents a 4-port circulator (an obvious extension of the symbol used in
Fig. 1 for 3-ports). By following the signal flow, it is obvious that the resulting
structure is a circulator 8-port with circulation in the order 1, 2, ... , 8, 1. In
Biconjugate 4-ports 201
1,4 1'2'
,
... 1
2 3 4
5
1
8 7 6
2,3 3'/+'
Fm. 7.6 FIG. 7.7
a similar interconnection of a number k of 4-ports, the two extreme 4-ports

have 3 free ports, whereas the k - 2 intermediate 4-ports have 2 free ports.
The total number of ports is, therefore, 2(3) + +
(k - 2)2 = 2k 2 = n and is
even. Since each 4-port contains one gyrator, the number of gyrators is
k = (n - 2) /2. We further remark that the circulator of Fig. 6 reduces to the
3-port circulator of Fig. 4 if port 3 of Fig. 6 is short-circuited and the terminals
suitably renumbered. Consequently, by short-circuiting one port in a circu-
lator n-port with n even, one obtains a circulator (n - 1)-port, and this covers
the fase where the number of ports is odd, with the same number of gyrators;
since n - I plays the role of n in the above formula, one has now k = (n - I) /2.
To conclude, we have obtained a realization of an n-port circulator with a
number of gyrators given by
k={(n-2)/2 for n even
(n -1)/2 for n odd
This number is precisely one-half of (53) and is therefore minimal; con-
sequently, no further discussion is needed for the cases n > 4.
42. A matched reciprocal 4-port has a scattering matrix of the form
S= r~12
Sia
(57)
S14
For a lossless 4-port, unitarity requires
1s121 2 + 1sl31 2 + IS14l 2 = 1; IS1al 2 + IS2al 2 + ISa41 2 = I

IS12l 2 + IS2al 2 + IS241 2 = 1; IS141 2 + IS241 2 + ISa41 2 = 1
Adding the left-hand side equations and subtracting the sum of the right-
hand side equations, one obtains
(58)
By cyclic permutations, one obtains similarly
(59)
On the other hand, unitarity also imposes relations of the form
S1*s S2s + Si*4 S24 = 0

which can be written
(60)
Relation (60) expresses that the entry (I, 2) of SS vanishes; by taking the
similar relations for entries ( 1, 3) and (2, 3) and by multiplying the three
relations together, one obtains
IS12S1aS2al 2 = -IS14S24Sa41 2 (61)

By (58-59), relation (61) is possible only if
S12S1aS2a = S14S24Sa4 = 0 (62)

so one of the entries of the left-hand side of (62) must vanish. By suitable
port numbering, one may assume S12 = 0, hence Sa 4 = 0 by (58); so (57)
reduces to
(63)
where N is a unitary matrix of dimension 2. The ports are thus divided into
two sets (1, 2) and (3, 4) without mutual transmission between ports belong-
ing to the different sets. Such a transmission pattern is similar to the one
occurring in a Wheatstone bridge, and a 4-port characterized by this property
is called biconjugate. We have thus proved that a matched lossless reciprocal 4-port
is biconjugate.
43. For a lossless matched reciprocal constant 4-port, the matrix S, thus N, is real
and orthogonal
N'N=NN'=h (64)
Let Nin (6.54) be an orthogonal matrix; the scattering matrix reduces to
(63), and the 4-port is a transformer 4-port ofratio matrix N, thus realizable
as Fig. 8. The relations (64) are
(65)
(66)
~
I'
3 4
!.
3' 4'
FIG. 7.8
Solving (66) for n22 and substituting the result in (65), one obtains nr2 = n~l'
hence n21 = ±n12. Equation (66) then gives n22 = =fn11, so N is of the
form
N= [P±q (67)
with the only condition

(68)
The sign option in (67) corresponds to a trivial polarity reversal. With the
upper signs, the realization of Fig. 8 turns into Fig. 9, where the negative
turns -p are represented as a reversal of the winding terminals. The 4-port
of Fig. 9 is called a terminating set in wire transmission technique. In the par-
ticular case of the symmetrical terminating set, one has p = q = l /J'i and the
matrix (67) reduces to
N= J?.1 [ 11 (69)
All noninfinite transmission losses are then ½log 2 = 0.345 Neper.
44. The 4-port of Fig. 9 is normalized to unit resistances at all ports. De-
normalization with respect to arbitrary terminations R, is obtained by the
J J
inverse operation of (6.51), that is, by dividing by R1 and R2 the windings
3 3'
fo---
4 4'
Fm. 7.9
in parallel with ports I and 2, respectively, and by multiplying by ,J'Ra

and
.jR:i the windings in series with ports 3 and 4, respectively. The resulting
turns ratio appear in Fig. 10. If the conditions
P=JR1/R3; q=JR1/R4 (70)

are satisfied, the upper transformer of Fig. IO has the ratio 1/1/1 and is
equivalent to a parallel connection as shown in dotted lines. The resulting
4-port is redrawn in Fig. 11 where the polarity of one winding has been
changed, since in the representation of Fig. 11 all aligned winding directions
are assumed identical. By (68), the conditions (70) require
(71)
which means that R 1 is the parallel combination of R3 and R4. Provided this
relation holds between the reference resistances, the terminating set is
realizable by the differential transformer of Fig. 11 containing a single core.
45. In the symmetric case where p = q = 1/.j2, condition (70) gives

2R1 = R3 = R4. If, in addition, one takes R2 = R3 and terminates port I on
R 1 = R3/2, the resulting 3-port reduces to Fig. 12 (where the polarity of
ports 3 and 4 has been reversed to produce a common ground), which is
'I
j
i!
3 4
,-r::.
I ,c:. ,I
3' 4·
Fm. 7.10
called a hybrid coil, because of the hybrid (resistive and transformer) nature
of its elements. By lemma 6.10, its scattering matrix is obtained by deleting
row and column 1 of (63) where N is (69); a further multiplication of the
last two rows and columns by -1 to account for the polarity reversal yields
~]
-1
0 (72)
0
!3 l
1
!
4
n
2
Fm. 7.11
2'
2 2'
3
LJ
1/ ff 1/ Y2
3'0----------04'
Fm. 7.12
Since an incoming signal from port 3 delivers nothing to port 4, the loss from
3 to 2 is independent of the termination connected on 4. For that reason, this
3-port is commonly used as directional coupler to interconnect two transmission
paths into one common path, without interaction.
46. Let a symmetric terminating set of ratio matrix (69) be closed at its
shunt ports on a symmetric 2-port of impedance matrix (4.16). The resulting
2-port seen from the series ports has, by the first theorem of 4.8, the impedance
matrix
!2 [l1 -1
l] [Zn
Z12
Z12]
Zn 1
[l -1
l] =[Zn+0 Z12 O
Zn -Z12
] (73)
and is, therefore, equivalent to two disconnected one-ports of impedances

(4.18). If the original symmetric 2-port was passive, so are the impedances
(4.18), for the above construction realizes them concretely. Conversely, if the
lattice impedances (4.18) are passive, the entries of the impedance matrix
(4.16) of a symmetric 2-port are (4.17), and the impedance matrix is realiz-
able by one of the networks of Figs. 4. 7, 4.8, or 4.12. This proves that a necessary
and sufficient condition for the realizability of a symmetric (real) passive 2-port is
that its lattice impedances (4.18) be positive (real) functions. Although the above
proof assumed the existence of an impedance matrix, the theorem is clearly
general, for the only exceptional cases occur when Z1 or Z 2, or both, are
infinite.
47. In addition to the realizations of 4.20, new canonic circuits are obtained
by reversing transformation (73). Since N is orthogonal, the impedance
matrix of the symmetric 2-port is computed backwards as
(74)
where N is (69). By the first theorem of 4.8, the 2-port is then realized as a
terminating set whose two ports belonging to the same set (for instance 1
and 2) are closed on the separate impedances Z1 and Z2. If the terminating
set embodied in Fig. 12 is used, the load at port 1 must be halved and the
Z2 i,!
li
w
:1
Ii
)]
l
I
I
i
2 Ii
1/Yz 1/ f2 11
21/2
1 ' 0 - - - - - - - - 2'
Fm. 7.13
resulting circuit is Fig. 13. The transformer can be further replaced by an

auto-transformer if Z2 is doubled, as shown on Fig. 14. Another realization
is obtained if ports 3 and 4 (instead of 1 and 2) of the terminating set are
closed on Z1 and Z2; if this is done in Fig. 13, and if the turn ratios are
multiplied by J2, thus the impedances by 2, the circuit of Fig. 15 results.
The new canonic realizations of Figs. 14 and 15 are called Jaumann structures.
48. The scattering matrix S related to z by (6.45) is also diagonalized by the

congruence transformation based on (69), since the unit matrix 12 is in-
variant by this orthogonal transformation. The entries S1 and S2 of the
diagonalized scattering matrix are given by expressions similar to (4.18),
that is,
(75)
..__.-.....n2
1•n-______..,_______.,.,2•
FIG. 7.14
., and, conversely,
,, (76)
The diagonalized form of (6.45) separates into
z1 -1 z2 -1
S1=--; S2=-- (77)
z1 + 1 z2 +1
Finally, (76) and (77) give
S11 (78)
(z1 + l)(z2 + 1)
S 12 = z1 - z2
(79)
(z1 + l)(z2 + 1)
The expressions (78-79) are useful to compute the scattering parameters of
a symmetric 2-port in terms of its lattice impedances.
:.3
FIG. 7.15
Matched 2-ports 209
Matched 2-ports 5
49. It was mentioned in 6.17 that the product of two bounded (real, para-unitary)
functions is bounded (real, para-unitary). The combination
(80)
of two reflectances is translated by (6.9) and (6.10) into the combination
Z=---
+
1 z1z2
(81)
z1 z2+
of the corresponding normalized impedances, which is realized by Fig. 16.
On the other hand, a realization using each impedance only once is obtained
1/z 1 z1
1 1'
1/z2 z2
:I
I
:
Fm. 7.16
by means of a circulator 3-port (Fig. 17). A unit signal incoming at port 0

is circulated to port 1, where it is reflected by z 1 with the amplitude s1 ;
the reflected signal s1 is circulated to port 2 where it is reflected by z 2 , thus
multiplied by s2; finally the amplitude (80) is circulated back to port O so
that the impedance seen from port 1 is (81). With the realization of the
circulator embodied in Fig. 3, Fig. 17 becomes Fig. 18. To conclude, the
1
~
0 z1
z1
z2
1'
Fm. 7.17 Fm. 7.18
210 7. Positive matrices and bounded matriecs
impedance (81) corresponding to the product (80) of two ref{,ectances is realized as

Fig. 16 or Fig. 18.
50. The multiplicative property (80) gets another interesting interpretation

when the individual factors are considered as transmittances of matched
2-ports, rather than as reflectances of one-ports. The scattering matrix of a
matched 2-port has the form (6. 78), and the corresponding 2-port is realized
as shown in Fig. 19 as a circulator 4-port closed on the impedances za and
Zb whose reflectances are S1 2 and S2 1, respectively; to prove that the scatter-
ing matrix of the 2-port of Fig. 19 is (6.78), it is sufficient to follow the signal
flow as in 49. In the cascade combination of two matched 2-ports, the trans-
mittances in each direction combine multiplicatively by (6.95); when the
combined matched 2-port is realized as a single structure according to Fig.
19, the constituent impedances are combined by (81 ).
z
+ +
.I +
I
1/z
Fm. 7.19 FIG. 7.20
If the matched 2-port is reciprocal, that is, if S12 = S21 = s, it is also

symmetric, and the canonic realizations of 47 are available. By (76), the
matching condition gives S1 = -S2, and (77) shows that the lattice im-
pedances are dual of each other. The canonic realization of a reciprocal
matched 2-port is shown in Fig. 20 where the 4-port represented as a square
black box is any of the realizations of the terminating set of ratio matrix (69),
thus of scattering matrix (63), between unit terminations, and where the
sign pattern reproduced inside the black box corresponds to the sign of the
entries of (69).
When two reciprocal matched two-ports of identical reference resistance
are cascaded, the result is again matched reciprocal, since the over-all
transmittance is the product of the individual transmittances and is the same
in both directions. The over-all 2-port is again matched reciprocal and is
realizable as Fig. 20 where one canonic impedance is the combination (81)
of the lattice impedances of the constituents matched 2-ports, whereas the
second lattice impedance is its dual.
Matched 2-ports 211
51. In 46, it was shown that the lattice impedances of a symmetric 2-port
are produced by closing a terminating set on the 2-port. As a consequence,
the lattice impedance (81), and its dual, of a cascade combination of two
matched reciprocal 2-ports must be produced by the circuit of Fig. 21, and
+ + + +
+ +
1/ z 1 1/zz
fZ
+ +
t11z
Fm. 7.21
this will now be checked. Consider the cyclic interconnection of three ter-
minating sets occurring in Fig. 21 as the 6-port of Fig. 22, and compute its
scattering matrix between unit terminations. A unit signal incoming at port I
is transmitted as I/ J2
on paths b and c; the signal on b is again divided by J2
to become ½at ports 2 and 5, whereas the signal on c similarly becomes ½at
port 3 and -½ at port 6; path a transmits no signal when the 6-port is
energized from I. A similar analysis from other ports leads to the scattering
matrix
0 I 0 -1
0 -1 0
0 -1 0
S=½ ----------------------------------------,--·············--·-·-------------------- (82)
0 -1 I 0 -1
0 -1 -1 0 -1
-1 0 -1 -1 0
a
2 3
5 6
4
+ +
:; 1
FIG. 7.22
Since the 6-port is matched, lossless, and reciprocal, this matrix is of the form
(6.54), with r = n - r = 3, by 6.33. By (6.56) and with the forms of Saa and
Sab implicit in (82), one obtains
N~H -1
0
I
(83)
The matrix [1 3 , NJ is clearly the reduced incidence matrix of the graph of

Fig. 23. We have thus proved that the 6-ports of Figs. 22 and 23 are equivalent.
Applying this equivalence to Fig. 21, one obtains Fig. 24, which is a balanced
Fm. 7.23 Fm. 7.24

Matched 2-ports 213
bridge, so that the impedances seen from ports 1 or 4 are independent of the
termination at the other port. With port 4 shorted, the network seen from
port 1 is exactly the one-port of Fig. 16, so its impedance is (81). It is easily
checked that the impedance seen from port 4 is 1/z. Consequently, the bridge
of Fig. 24 realizes simultaneously the impedance (81) and its dual.
52. Consider the particular case of Fig. 19 whereZa = oo; the 4-port circu-
lator reduces to a 3-port circulator and one clearly has S12 = 1, and the
matched 2-port has a scattering matrix of the form
~] (84)
If the circulator 3-port is realized in accordance with Fig. 3, one obtains
10---.
..... --□2
1'u--------u2'
Fm. 7.25
Fig. 25. Finally, the matched 2-port of scattering matrix (84) is realized by Fig. 25
with zgiven by (6.10).
53. If a matched 2-port (reciprocal or not) is lossless, the transmittances

S12 and S21 of its matrix (7 .68) are para-unitary functions and have unit
modulus at all real frequencies. Consequently, the corresponding attenua-
tions A12 and A21 are zero at all frequencies; the 2-port operating between
its nominal resistances transmits all frequencies without attenuation and is
called an all-pass network. A matched lossless 2-port is an all-pass.
The realization of all-pass 2-ports is immediate by the circuits of Fig. 19
(general case) or Fig. 20 (reciprocal case), and the constituent immittances
are lossless. It also results from 50 that a cascade of (reciprocal) all-pass
2-ports of identical reference resistances is a (reciprocal) all-pass of identical
resistances. Conversely, it is interesting to discuss the decomposition of an
all-pass into a cascade of simple all-pass sections. Since the transmittances in
either direction are multiplied in a cascade connection, the decomposition
is equivalent to a factorization of the transmittances. In the nonreciprocal

case, it is sufficient to treat the case S12 = 1, for the general all-pass of scattering
matrix (6. 78) is the cascade of an all-pass of similar matrix with S12 = I and of an
all-pass with S21 = 1. The realization of the first case is achieved by Fig. 25,
whereas the realization of the latter results from the first by changing the
direction of the circulator, thus the polarity of the gyrator.
54. The transmittance ofan all-pass is of the form (6.15) in general, and of
the form (6.16) in the real case, and its factorization was discussed in 6.20.
A first degree all-pass factor is of the form (6.35). Since it is bounded para-
unitary, the corresponding positive function (6.10)
Ol:Q
Z=--- (85)
p+jwo
is para-odd and represents the normalized impedance of a lossless one-port.
After denormalization by R, the impedance is the parallel combination of a
capacitance I /ao R with an imaginary resistance ao R/jwo. In accordance
with Fig. 25, the all-pass of scattering matrix (84) between terminations R,
wheres is (6.35), is realized as the.first degree section of Fig. 26. It remains to
consider the factor k = e# of (6.15). The corresponding impedance (6.10) is
!
!I I
z=
I -ei¢
--.¢ = - j cot cp/2 (86)
' I+e3
and is an imaginary resistance. The all-pass of scattering matrix (84) where
s = k is, therefore, realized as the section of degree zero of Fig. 27. Finally every
all-pass of scattering matrix (6.84) is equivalent to a cascade of sections of Fig. 26
with one section of Fig. 27.
55. In the case of a real all-pass, the factors (6.35) are either real, thus
reducing to
ao-P
(87)
ao +P
1n---, ---<..]2
1/Ra.o
-iRcot'P/2
1'0------' '----u2' 1'0------02'
Fm. 7.26 Fm. 7.27
Matched 2-ports 215
or occur in conjugate pairs to be combined into

(0!0 -p)2 + w~
(88)
(O!o + p)2 + w~
The all-pass of scattering matrix (84) is realized as the real first-degree section
of Fig. 28 (Fig. 26 with wo = 0) ifs is (87), and as the real second-degree section
1n--------n2
10--.....1---02
1/Ra.o
R(a.2+w2)
0 0
~
:1
I
,___-u2' I
fo-----' 1'0----' '----02'
Fm. 7.28 Fm. 7.29
of Fig. 29 if s is (88): the resonant circuit appearing in Fig. 29 has the

normalized impedance [(89) does not exist]
z = (O!~ + w~ + p 2 )/2p0!0 (90)
deduced from (88) by (6.10). Finally, one has k = ±I, thus <p = 0 or 7T, and
(86) reduces to O or oo, so the 2-port of Fig. 27 reduces to a straight connec-
tion or to the gyrator alone. To conclude: any real all-pass ef scattering matrix
(84) is equivalent to a cascade ef real sections of degree I and 2 (Figs. 28 and 29)
possibly completed by one gyrator.
56. In the case of reciprocal all-passes, the corresponding factors of S12 and
S21 must be grouped to yield reciprocal sections. The cascade connection of a
section of Fig. 25 with its transpose (the same section with a polarity reversal
of the gyrator) yields the reciprocal section of Fig. 20, which can be realized
in any of the equivalent forms discussed in 46 with z1 = z and z 2 = I/ z.
With the configuration of Fig. 4. 7, the combination of Fig. 28 with its trans-
pose gives Fig. 30, whereas the combination of Fig. 29 with its transpose
gives Fig. 31. On the other hand, the 2-port of scattering matrix (6. 78) with
S 12 = S 21 = ± I is Fig. 1.16 or 1.1 7. Finally, airy real reciprocal all-pass is equiv-
alent to a cascade of sections ef Figs. 30 and 31, possibly completed by a polarity
reversal.
,~----.... ---02
R/2~
T2/Ra 0
1'0 o2'
Fm. 7.30
\
i:
1 2
1/a0 R Rao
a2+w2
0 0
1
I
R/4a 0
4a 0
T R(a6+w6)
fo 02'
Fm. 7.31
Bridged-T networks
57. The 2-port of Fig. 32 is called a bridged-T network. By an immediate
application of Bartlett's theorem, its lattice impedances are
zbz
Z1=Z+Za; Z2-zb+z (91)
In particular, if Z = R and Za Zb = R 2 , one also has Z 1 Z 2 = R 2, and the

bridged-T is a matched 2-port. Its transmission coefficient between ter-
minations equal to R is then, by (79),
S12 = (1 + 2Zb/R)-1 (92)
Bridged-T networks 217
-----02
fn---------------02'
Fm. 7.32
and is, therefore, the same as the one (6.71) of a simple series impedance i
Z = 4Zb between the same terminations. In contrast with the canonical !I
realization of a matched 2-port where any prescribed bounded function S12
is acceptable, the impedance Zb/2R = (1 - S12)- 1 resulting from (92) is only
passive if its real part is nonnegative at real frequencies. In terms of the
I
'
attenuation and phase, this gives the condition
:]
eA cos B > I (93) I
to be compared with A > 0 for the canonic realization.
58. Consider the matched bridged-T network of Fig. 32 with Z = R and

Za Zb = R 2 in cascade with an attenuator of identical nominal impedance
R and attenuation A, hence of lattice impedances (6.87-88). The combined
circuit is a matched 2-port and its canonic impedances combine according
to (81). By subtracting R, one obtains the impedance Z~ (playing the role
of Za) in the bridged-T equivalent of the over-all 2-port. One thus obtains
Z' = (R + Za)R coth A/2 +R 2 -R

a R + Za + R coth A/2
RZa(coth A/2 -1)
Za + R(I + coth A/2)
and this is the parallel combination of
R(coth A/2 - 1)
with
coth A/2 -1
Za-----=e-AZa
coth A/2 + 1
Finally, the combined circuit is realized as Fig. 33. This shows that, at the
2R
coth(A/2)-1 2eAza
R
R [coth(A/2)-1 ]12
•l, fu-----------------02'
: \, Fm. 7.33
,,:
.
,,
,,' price of an additional constant attenuation, resistance (simulating the dis-
sipation in the elements) can be introduced in the branches Za/2 and 2Zb of
any bridged-T network.
59. By Bartlett's theorem, the lattice impedances of the 2-port of Fig. 34
Zb
1 2
N N
,, 1 2 2 1 2'
Zb
Fm. 7.34
where the same 2-port called N occurs twice) are the I-ports of Figs. 35 and
36. Conversely, if Z1 and Z2 contain a virtually identical 2-port Nin their
structure, N can be extracted from the lattice; this extraction is particularly
useful in the case when Z1 and 2 2 contain a common series or shunt
impedance.
N N
Za z-:j>
2 1 2--
Fm. 7.35 Fm. 7.36
60. As an application, consider the Jaumann structure of Fig. 14 where

Z 1 = R and where Z 2 contains R in parallel, that is, where it is of the form
Zb Rj ( Zb + R), and further assume that Zb is an antiresonant circuit of
elements Land C: this particularized Jaumann circuit is represented on Fig.
37, the inductance 2L being incorporated into the ideal transformer to pro-
duce an inductance with center-tap. After extraction of R in parallel, the
2R
C/2
2L
---~2
1'0-----..,__----02'
Fm. 7.37
lattice of impedance Za = oo and Zb reduces to a simple series impedance

2Zb, and the resulting network is shown on Fig. 38. Consequently, the
2-ports of Figs. 37 and 38 are equivalent. In Fig. 37, the resistance 2R may
represent the losses of the antiresonant circuit, and the equivalence with
Fig. 38 (where it is obvious that an attenuation pole occurs at the antireso-
nance frequency) shows that the effects of the losses in the antiresonant circuit
in the neighborhood Gf the attenuation pole are compensated in Fig. 37 by

the additional branch R/2. Since the two resistances R of Fig. 38 can be
absorbed in parallel in the terminations, exact compensation of the losses is
possible.
C/2
1 2
2L
R R
1· 2'
Fm. 7.38
61. The reciprocal all-pass section of Fig. 31 has as normalized lattice

impedances (90) and its inverse, that is, the denormalized impedances
and
C/2
1'0--------02'
Fm. 7.39
By taking Z = 1/C1p in (91), hence Za = L1P and

ZZ2
Zb=---
Z-Z2
hence
with
C = (w~ - 3oc~) /2Roc 0
the all-pass is realized as the bridged- T of Fig. 39 with all positive elements if
wo > J3oco, i.e., if arg (oco +jwo) > arc tg 1/J3 = rr/3.
chapter 8
Degree and canonic forms
The degree of an n-port

1. The degree of a well-defined network was defined in 2.5 as the number of
state variables, that is, as the number of independent reactive elements
contained in the network. It was identified with the degree of the network
determinant in 2.17 and further discussed in 4.55-61. This suggests the
following purely algebraic definition: the degree of a nonsingular polynomial
matrix is the degree ef its determinant. Note that, with this definition, a uni-
modular matrix has degree zero, so that the degree is not related in a simple
manner with the highest power of p occurring in the matrix entries. Also
the degree of a square matrix is not alt~red when it is multiplied on the right
or on the left by a unimodular matrix.
2. We now wish to extend the above definition to the case of a rectangular

polynomial matrix F. The linear equation Fx = 0, where F is an (r · s)-
matrix of normal rank r < s and thus contains a number of independent
equations smaller than the number of variables, occurs in the description of
incompletely specified networks, that is, subnetworks and n-ports. On the
other hand, the case r > s has no physical interpretation, so our definition
will be limited to the case r < s. Starting with a linear system of rank r, one
can form a well-defined system by adding some s - r equations, that is, by
supplying the information necessary to convert the subnetwork into a com-
plete network; in particular, for an n-port, the additional equations are the
terminal conditions. If one wishes to define the degree of an n-port in such a
way that it remains equal to the number of independent reactive elements
contained in the n-port, one must exclude reactive elements from the
222
The degree of an n-port 223
terminations; the degree of the n-port is then defined as the degree of the
network formed by closing the n-port on the most general nonreactive
terminations. This suggests the following algebraic definition: the degree ef an
(r · s) porynomial matrix F ef normal rank r < s is the degree ef the determinant of
the square matrix obtained by bordering F by s - r additional rows ef constant entries
of su.fficientry general values to make the resulting degree as large as possible.
3. Let
(s)
(r)
(s -r) [~] (1)
be the bordered matrix, where A is a constant matrix. By the Laplace

expansion, the determinant of ( l) is the sum of minors of dimension r of F
each multiplied by a complementary minor of dimension s - r of A. The
degree of the determinant of ( l) will ultimately be the degree of a nonzero
minor (there may be several such minors) of F of dimension r of highest
degree. Definition 2 is thus equivalent to the following: the degree ef an (r · s)
porynomial matrix ef normal rank r s;; s is the degree of its nonsingular minor ef
dimension r of highest degree. Note that minors of dimension < r might have
higher degrees: for instance, a unimodular square matrix is of degree zero,
but may contain entries (minors of dimension l) of arbitrary degree.
4. Let P be an arbitrary square nonsingular polynomial matrix of dimension

r. Every minor of dimension r of PF is det P times a minor of order r of F,
so one has
Deg PF= Deg P + Deg F (2)
In particular, the degree of a rectangular porynomial matrix is not altered when it is
premultiplied by a unimodular matrix. On the other hand, the degree is generally
altered by postmultiplication, unless Fis square, or unless the right multiplier
is constant nonsingular.
5. Since the (r · s)-matrix F has normal rank r, it contains a square sub-

matrix Fa of dimension and normal rank r. The partition F =[Fa, Fb] and
a corresponding partition of the vector x, permits one to write the system
Fx = 0 as
or
224 8. Degree and canonic forms
thus defining a rational matrix of dimension r · (s - r)
(3)
whose entries are rational functions of p. It is essentially in this way that

impedance of hybrid matrices were introduced for n-ports in 3.11-14. It is
therefore natural to define the degree of rational matrix Z as the degree of
the polynomial matrix F = [Fa, F b] from which it originates. As mentioned,
however, in 3.42--44, a common left factor of Fa and Fb cancels in (3), so
that Z only defines F within an arbitrary left nonsingular matrix factor of
1,
I' dimension r. Since Z thus only characterizes an n-port within weak equi-
valence, it is natural to define the degree of Z as the degree of some simplest
ti polynomial matrix [Fa, Fb] where Fa and Fb are left coprime. As in 3.43,
with Z = N/g where N is a polynomial matrix and g some common denomin-
ator (not necessarily the least), let D be a g.c.l.d. of dimension r of glr and N.
The pair of polynomial matrices Fa= -gD- 1 , Fb = D- 1 N are left coprime.
Since D is unique except for a unimodular right factor by A.81, appearing
as a left factor in D- 1 , thus in F, the degree of F thus defined is unique,
owing to 4. In conclusion, the degree ,if a rational matrix Z = N/g is the degree
of the polynomial matrix [ -gD- 1 , D- 1 N] where D is a g.c.l.d. of glr and N.
Note that, when Z is scalar, one obtains the usual definition of the degree
of a rational function.I
6. Consider now the particular case of a polynomial matrix Z = N, with

g = I. Since D divides Ir, it is unimodular, and one can set D =Ir, for D
is only defined within an arbitrary unimodular factor. Consequently, the
last definition leads us to define the degree of N as the degree of [lr, N],
which is absurd as may be seen on the example
N= [~ f]
which is unimodular, thus of degree 0, whereas [h, N] contains the sub-
matrix of dimension 2
[~ f]
of determinant -p, thus of degree I. Consequently, our definitions of the
degree for polynomial matrices, on one hand, and for rational matrices (of
which polynomial matrices are a particular case) on the other, are not
coherent (except for scalars) and this clearly results from the fact that a
rational matrix of dimensions r · (s - r) is related to a polynomial matrix of
The degree of an n-port 225
different dimensions r · s. Since both definitions have been naturally intro-

duced and will in fact appear useful, it is convenient to distinguish them by
different names and notations. Since the definition introduced in connection
with rational matrices is invariant with respect to weak equivalence, we call
the corresponding concept weak degree (deg), whereas the definition originally
introduced for polynomial matrices characterizes the strong degree (Deg).
Only the weak degree is considered when dealing with rational matrices,
and its definition, as introduced in 5, is
deg N/g = Deg [ -gD-1, D-IN] (4)
7. In the particular case of polynomial matrices (g = 1, D = Ir), one has
deg N = Deg [ -1 r, N] (5)
and there is no longer any paradox in (5) since the weak degree of a matrix
is now identified with the strong degree of a larger matrix.
The strong degree was only defined for polynomial matrices of dimen-
sions r · s with rs s. On the other hand, the dimensions of Z are r · q with
q = s - r and the restriction rs s merely requires q > 0, so that the weak
degree is definedfor any rectangular rational matrix.
8. In 5, the degree of an n-port was defined as the strong degree of the poly-
nomial matrix F appearing in the n-port equation Fx = 0. If, however, the
n-port is characterized by a rational (impedance, admittance, or hybrid)
matrix, it is only defined within weak equivalence. The degree of the n-port
is then naturally defined as the weak degree of this rational matrix. The
definition which has been adopted is such that this degree coincides with the
strong degree of some simplest polynomial matrix from which the rational
matrix originates; as already mentioned, this polynomial matrix is unique
except for a unimodular left factor, and the degree is thus unique, and
independent of the particular rational matrix (impedance, admittance, or
hybrid) from which it originates. In particular, if z- 1 exists, one has deg z- 1 =
deg Z automatically, since both rational matrices originate from the same
polynomial matrix. More generally, the degree of an n-port is the weak degree of
any rational matrix expressing some n-port variables in terms of the remaining n-port
variables and is invariant with respect to the particular choice of the inde-
pendent variables. The invariance also remains true if the port variables are
replaced by some linear combinations with constant coefficients of the
original variables, for this merely multiplies the polynomial matrix F on
the right by some constant matrix. In particular, the degree of a scattering
matrix is equal to the degree of the associated impedance or admittance matrix.
Properties of the degree

9. In the following, we deal only with properties of the weak degree, and the
qualifier will be omitted. Since (5) defines deg N in terms of minors of
dimension r of [ -Ir, N], and since any such minor is a minor of some
dimension t( <r) of N multiplied by a minor of dimension r - t of -Ir, equal
to ± 1, one obtains the following alternative definition: the degree of a poly-
nomial matrix is the largest degree reached by any of its minors of any dimension.
This is in contrast with the strong degree, which only considered minors of
maximum dimension. As a corollary, a polynomial matrix has degree zero ijf it
is constant.
10. Since any minor of N + A can be expanded in terms of minors of N

multiplied by complementary minors of A, one has
deg (N +A) =deg N (6)
for any polynomial matrix N and any constant matrix A. Note that the last two
theorems do not hold for the strong degree.
11. For a rational matrix, definition (4) can also be written

deg N/g = Deg [ -gir, N] - Deg D (7)
as results from (2) with P = D, F = [ -gD- 1 , In particular, if
D- 1 N].
Z = N/g has no pole at infinity, that is, if no entry of N has a degree larger than
the degree of g, no minor of dimension r of [ -g Ir , N] has a degree larger
than det (glr) =gr, thus (7) becomes
deg N/g = r deg g - Deg D (8)
12. If some entries of N have at least the degree of g, one can divide them
by g to yield a quotient and a remainder, and regroup the entries into a
quotient polynomial matrix Q and a remainder polynomial matrix R, thus
writing
N/g= Q +R/g
where all entries of R have a degree strictly smaller than g. We now prove
that the degree of a rational matrix is the sum of the degrees of its polynomial part Q
and of its strictly fractional part R/g. Since R/g has no pole at infinity, its degree
is given by an expression. of form (8), whereas the degrees of Q and N/g
are expressed in the forms (5) and (7), respectively. Since the g.c.l.d. of
g Ir and N = gQ + R is the g.c.l.d. of g Ir and R, the terms deg D cancel and
it remains to be proved that
Deg [-glr, N] =Deg [-Ir, Q] +rdegg (9)
Properties of the degree 227
But
-Ir
[ -glr, N] = [glr, R] [ O ( I 0)
and, by the Binet-Cauchy theorem, every minor of dimension r of ( I 0) is the

sum of minors of dimension r of [g Ir, R] multiplied by minors of dimension r
of the second matrix factor, that is, by minors of arbitrary dimension of Q.
The minor of dimension r of [g Ir , R] arising from det g Ir = gr combined
with the minor of Q of largest degree produce a contribution whose degree
is the second member of (9). On the other hand, no term of larger degree
can be produced, since any other minor of [g Ir, R] has necessarily a degree
smaller thanr deg g, because every entry of R has a degree smaller than deg g.
13. As a corollary, one has

deg ( Z + A) = deg Z ( 11)
for arry rational matrix Z and any constant matrix A. This results from the main
theorem and from (6), since A is incorporated in the polynomial part of Z.
14. JJ two rational matrices Z1 and Z2 have no common poles, one has
(12)
The theorem reduces to the preceding one if one of the matrices has poles
only at infinity, and the other matrix only finite poles. Since common poles,
even at infinity, are excluded in the statement of the theorem, it is sufficient
to treat the case where both Z1 and Z2 are strictly fractional. Let g 1 and g2
be the least common denominators of Z 1 and Z 2 , respectively. The rational
+
matrix Z = Z1 Z2 = N/g is characterized by
Since Z1 and Z2 have no common poles, g1 and g2 are coprime, and so are
g1lr, g2 Ir. The g.c.l.d. D1 of g1lr and N1 divides glr and Non the left,
since the scalar g2 commutes with D1. Similarly the g.c.l.d. D2 of g2 Ir and N 2
divides glr and Non the left. This shows that det D is divisible by det D 1
and det D2, thus by their product, since these determinants are coprime as
factors of det g1 Ir and det g2 Ir . Conversely, any common divisor of g1g2 Ir
and N must divide either g1 Ir or g2 Ir , for g1 and g2 are coprime. The common
+
left divisors of g1 Ir and N = g1N2 g2 N1 necessarily divide g2 N1, hence N1
(for g2 and g1 are coprime) hence D1. Similarly, the common left divisors
of g2 Ir and N divide D2. Consequently, det D cannot contain factors other
than those of det D1 and det D2, and one has det D = det D 1D 2 , hence
+
Deg D = Deg D1 Deg D2. Since (8) applies to Z, Z1, and Z2, and since
+
deg g = deg g1 deg g2 , the theorem is proved.
15. If A is a constant matrix, the degree of the polynomial matrix pA is the

rank of A, as an immediate consequence of theorem 9. On the other hand,
if pis replaced by a scalar rational functionf(p) in any rational matrix, the
degree of every entry, hence the degree of the matrix is multiplied by the
degree off (p). As a consequence, iff ( p) is a scalar rational fraction and A is a
constant matrix, one has
degfA = (degf) (rank A) ( 13)
16. Let the rational matrix Z have poles Pi, P2, of respective orders
k1, k2, ... as defined in 7.4. If each entry of Z is expanded into partial
fractions in accordance with 5.3b, the result is a matrix partial fraction
expansion of Z, of the form (5.3), where Zt(P) is a polynomial matrix whose
entries are of degree kt - 1 at most. Each term of (5.3) has only one pole
(Pt or infinity) and is called a unipolar component of Z. By theorems 12 and 14,
the degree of a rational matrix is the sum ef the degrees of its unipolar components.
17. If each matrix Zt(P), and p-k Zoo(P), is constant, and this is certainly
00
the case when all poles are simple (kt= 1), the degree of each unipolar
component is known by 15, and one has
m = deg Z = koo rank Zoo + L kt rank Zt ( 14)
a formula reducing to (5.4) in the scalar case. The case of a nonconstant
matrix Zt(P) is more difficult and will be treated in 21.
The McMillan form

18. The g.c.l.d. of the matrices A and B is identical to the g.c.l.d. of the matrices
AU and B V, with U and V unimodular arbitrary: if D divides A and B on the
left, it divides AU and BV; conversely, if F divides AU and BV, one has
AU=DX, BV=DY, thus A=D(XU- 1 ), B=D(YV- 1 ), so D divides A
and B.
19. Let E be the Smith canonic form of the polynomial matrix N, so one
has N = PEQ with P and Q unimodular. Let F be the g.c.l.d. of E and g 1r,
which is diagonal since both matrices are diagonal. By premultiplication by
P, PF is the g.c.l.d. of PE and gP. Applying theorem 18 with A= PE,
B = gP, U = Q, V = P- 1 , one finds that PF is the g.c.1.d. D of N and glr.
Consequently, one has Deg D = Deg Fin (7) or (8), and since Fis diagonal,
,its degree is the sum of the degrees of its entries. The entries ei of E are such
that each divides the next. The entry ]i of Fis the g.c.l.d. of g and ei, and
each ]i divides the next. If one writes etfg in its irreducible form nt/gt, the
factor which cancels is precisely ]i, so that each nt divides the next and each
i !
The McMillan form 229
gt divides the preceding. The irreducible form of E/g is called the McMillan
canonic form of Z = N/g. Since Deg D = Deg F = L deg.ft, expression (8),
holding for a matrix Z without poles at infinity, becomes
r
deg Z = r deg g - L deg.ft
i~l
r
= I
i~l
(deg g -deg.ft)
Since ft divides g, each term of the last sum is deg g/ft. Since the above
notation nifgi for the irreducible form of e1/g, with ft cancelled, assumes
ei = ft ni, g = ftgt, the last equation becomes
r
deg Z = I deg gi
i~l
(15)
and the degree of a rational matrix without poles at infinity is the sum of the degrees
of the denominators of its McMillan form.
20. The McMillan form is unique, as is the Smith form from which it originates,
by A.79. Let S = PMQ, where M = diag {hi/gt} is the McMillan form of a
bounded para-unitary matrix S. By S = S-1 = P-1M-1Q- 1, where P- 1 and
Q-1 are unimodular with P and Q, M- 1-is also a McMillan form ;f Sand
~ust coincide with M, except for a p;ssible relabeling. But the entries of M
are hi/gt where the gi are Hurwitz polynomials, whereas the entries of Jof- 1
are g1*/ht*. Because of the irreducible form of these entries and the divisi-
bility relations between the polynomials, one must have ht= g<n-i)* Con-
sequently, the McMillan form of a bounded para-unitary matrix is 2
diag {gn•/g1, g(n-l)*/g2, • •., g1•/gn} (16)
where the gi are Hurwitz polynomials each dividing the preceding. One also has
det S = II (gt*/gt), an irreducible fraction, so that the determinant of a (real)
bounded para-unitary matrix is a (real) bounded para-unitary function. Since S is
finite at infinity, deg S is the degree of Ilgt, and the degree of a bounded para-
unitary matrix is the degree of its determinant. Note that if S is para-unitary but
non bounded, the entries of ( 16) are not necessarily irreducible, and ( 16) is
not the McMillan form in that case. Note also that the degree of a bounded
matrix is not necessarily the degree of the determinant when the matrix is
not para-unitary, as shown by the following counter example of two separate
+ +
impedances Z 1 = Lp R 1 and Z 2 = R 1 (Ri - R 2) /Lp with L, R, and R1
positive and R1 > R, so that Z 2 contains a positive capacitance. The reflec-
tion coefficients with respect to Rare s1 = [p +
(R1 - R) /L]/[p +
(R1 R) /L +
+
and s2 = (R1 - R)s1/(R1 R). The scattering matrix is diagonal of entries s1
and s2 and has a constant determinant, although the 2-port is obviously of
degree 2.
21. Consider a unipolar matrix Z = A(p)/(p -p 0 )k corresponding to some

finite pole Po of order k, where A(p) is a polynomial matrix containing terms
up to pk- 1 • Since Z is finite at infinity, its degree can be computed by
theorem 19. By virtue of a remark in 15, the degree is not altered by the
substitution of p + Po top, which changes the matrix Z into A(p + Po) /pk=
B(p)/pk where B(p) is a polynomial matrix of the same form as A. Let
B = PEQ be the transformation of B into its Smith form. The McMillan
form of Z = B/pk is obtained by dividing Eby pk and replacing its entries
et/Pk by their irreducible forms ht/pa, with at~ a2 ~ · • • > at up to some
subscript t, and with at+l = at+2 = · · · = 0. The degree of Z is then o= a1 +
· · · +at. The integer t up to which the pole extends in the McMillan form
is called the span of the pole p = 0 of B /pk, or the span of the pole Po of Z.
22. Since the entries t + I, t + 2, ... of the McMillan form are finite at
p = 0, the principal value of the McMillan form is
h1(0)/pa,, ... , he(0)/pat, 0, ... , 0 (17)
With the notation Ll = diag {h1(0), ... , ht(0)} and G = diag {pa,}, the
+
principal value of E/pk is G- 1 ,'.l 0. With Po= P(0) and Qo = Q(0), the
principal value of B/pk is then P 0 (G- 1 Ll t 0)Qo. The constant matrix
P 0 (<'.l t 0) Q0 of rank t is called the McMillan residue matrix of B/pk at p = 0,
that is, of Z at Po.
23. The principal minor of dimension t of E/pk is (h1 · · · ht)/p0 and has thus
a pole of order oat p = 0, whereas no minor of this matrix can have a pole
reaching the same order. By the Binet-Cauchy theorem, every minor of Z is
the sum of minors of Et/Pk multiplied by polynomial matrices (minors of P
and Q) so that no minor of Z can have a pole of order larger than oat p = 0,
and only minors of dimension t can reach this maximum order. We now
prove that there is at least one minor of dimension t of Z having effectively
a pole of order o at p = 0. Since a minor of dimension t of B is ptk times the
corresponding minor of Z, a reduction of the order of the pole at p = 0
below o in all minors of dimension t of Z would require that all minors of
dimension t of B, thus their g.c.d., contain ptk-o+t with some e > 0. By
A.79 this g.c.d. is det Et= e1 ···et. In the transformation of det (Etfpk) =
(e 1 · · • et)/ptk into its irreducible form (h 1 · · · ht)P0 a factor ptk-o has been
cancelled, and this is the maximum cancellation so det Et cannot contain a
power of p larger than tk - o. We have thus proved that the degree of a unipolar
matrix is the order of the pole of largest order attained by any of its minors of all
dimensions, and that this order is effectively attained by at least one minor of dimension
t equal to the span of the pole.
Kalman's representation 231
24. The above theorem was proved only for a unipolar matrix having a
finite pole, but it is also true for a polynomial matrix. Since the order of a
pole at infinity of a minor is simply its degree, the first part of the theorem
reduces to 9. On the other hand, the replacement of p by I /p changes a
polynomial matrix into a unipolar matrix having a pole at p = 0. This
substitution permits one to extend to polynomial matrices the second part
of theorem 23 and the computation of the degree based on 21.
25. In the case where A is a constant matrix in the unipolar component

A/ (p - Po) k of a pole p0 of order k, the span of the pole is t = rank A, one has
a1 = a2 = · · · = at = k and the degree is 8 = tk; thus one obtains the par-
ticular results of 17. Moreover, the McMillan residue matrix is simply A,
whereas ~ is It •
26. If a rational matrix has degree zero, each of its unipolar components
must have degree zero. In particular, its polynomial part is of degree zero
and thus constant by the corollary of theorem 9. Every minor (hence every
entry of every unipolar component corresponding to a finite pole) must also
be devoid of poles, thus constant, for its numerator is of lower degree than
its denominator. This proves that a rational matrix has degree zero ijJ it is
constant.
Kalman 's representation 3

27. Consider the linear system
y=Wx ( 18)
where the constant matrix Wis partitioned
(s) (q)
Wabj =
wbb
[FH CJ] (s)
(r)
(19)
so that the submatrix Fis square, partition the vectors x andy conformally,
and consider the additional relation
Ya = -PXa (20)
The elimination ofya between (18) and (20) yields the system
0
(21)
-Ir
Finally, the algebraic elimination of xa between Eqs. (21) yields the relation
Yb= Zxb (22)
with
Z =J -H(pl 8 +F)- 1 G (23)
The above development simulates in general terms the elimination by
which the various relations of 4.27 have been obtained. For instance, for
q = r, the frequency-independent (s + r)-port of hybrid matrix (19) iden-
tified with the matrix of (3.8), whose s shunt ports are terminated on unit
capacitances, gives an r-port of impedance matrix (23), identical to (4.27)
with Ya= Pls.
28. By 3.49, system (21) is completely observable iff the submatrices p 18 + F

and H, coefficients of the internal variable vector Xa, are right coprime. If
this condition is satisfied, the rank of the matrix (21) may fall below its
normal rank only if the top matrix-row becomes locally singular, hence if
pI 8 +F and G have a common left factor. By 3.52, system (21) is thus com-
pletely controllable iff pl 8 +F and Gare left coprime. Note that a simpli-
fication occurs in (23) either in case of inobservability or of uncontrollability.
Finally, with the notations
N = [G, FG, ... , ps-IG] (24)
M= H
f!F
lHF s-1
] (25)
the system is completely observable and controllable iffrank N = rank M = s

owing to A.84 and to the transpose theorem.
The weak degree of the polynomial matrix in (2 I) is clearly s. Conse-
quently, the degree of the rational matrix (23) is also s if the network is
completely controllable and observable. In the opposite case, the simplifi-
cations occurring in (23) reduce the degree of Z below s. Combining this
with the previous remark, the degree ef (23) is s ijf
rank N = rank M = s (26)
29. The following paragraphs are devoted to the proof of the converse
theorem: every rational matrix Z ef degree s and dimensions r · q, finite at infinity,
admits at least one representation of the form (23) where F, G, H, J are constant
matrices efdimensions (19) such that (24-26) hold. Clearly J=Z(oo) in (23),
so it is sufficient to establish the representation
Z = -H(pl 8 +F)- 1 G (27)

Kalman 's representation 233
for matrices vanishing at infinity. Since

H1(Pls 1 +F1)- 1G1 +H2(Pls 2 +F2)- 1G2
= [Hi H 2] [Pls 1 :Fi (28)
it is sufficient to prove the theorem for each unipolar component of Z

separately. Since the substitution of p - Po top in (27) merely replaces F by
F -Pols without altering Hand G, it is sufficient to deal with a unipolar
matrix Z = B(p)/pk, where Bis a polynomial matrix containing terms up to
pk-l at most.
With the notations of 21, one has Z = PMQ where M is (17), that is,
the direct sum of its entries ht/pai. Let (hi) denote a matrix having ht as only
nonzero entry. In the product P(htfpa;)Q, only column i of P and row i of Q
are involved. Denote by u the product of column i of P by ht (this gives a
polynomial column matrix) and by v' row i of Q (so that v is also a poly-
nomial column matrix). One thus has
P(hi)Q = uv' (29)
Write
where the constant vectors uo, u1, u2, ... form a constant matrix (of yet
unspecified column dimension) U. With a similar notation for v = vo
+ v1p + · · · where the vectors form a matrix V, (29) becomes
P(hi)Q =UK V' (30)
with
p
p2
p4
.. ·1
... (31)
Expression (30) takes account only of one diagonal entry of (17), and the
constant matrices U and V' must thus be written with a subscript i. The
general expression for Z is then a sum of expressions of the type (30), each
divided by pai, so one has
t
Z(p) = L UiK(p) v;;pa, (32)
i-1
Since Z is zero at infinity, the contribution to (32) of the terms K/pa1 which
do not vanish at infinity, originating from terms of degree ai or larger in (31 ),
must cancel in (32) and can be ignored in each term Kjpa1 from the start.
One may thus limit the useful part of K/pa1 to the matrix
p-a- p-2
[ ~~~:+l p-1 (33)
p-1 0 0
of dimension ai, and this limits accordingly Ui to its first ai columns, and
V.[ to its first ai rows.
Let R 8 be the matrix of dimension s containing s - I unit entries just
above the main diagonal, and zeros elsewhere. The product AR8 shifts the
columns of A one step to the right, filling the first column with zeros. Con-
sequently, R; contains s - 2 entries at distance 2 above the main diagonal,
and similarly for higher powers, up to R! = 0. Consider the Taylor expansion
00
= L R~/pk+I
k=O
Owing to the properties of R!, the series stops at the term R!- 1 /p 8 and the
matrix (pl 6 - R8 )- 1 is upper triangular with entries p- 1 on the main diagonal,
p- 2 above it, ... up to an entry p-s in the top right-hand corner. Withs= ai
this is precisely (33) in which the columns are ordered backwards. If one
designates by Gi the matrix V[ with a reverse ordering of the rows, one thus
has
t
Z(p) = - L Hi(Pla1 +Fa1)- 1Gi (35)
i=l
with Hi= -Ui, Fa 1 = -Ra1. By (28), the sum is of the form (27) where F
is the direct sum of the matrices F a1 of dimensions a;, so that the dimension
of Fis I, a; = o, the degree of Z in 21, called here s.
The particular representation (35) thus obtained is called Kalman's
canonic representation of Z. Since s coincides with deg Z in (23), no simpli-
fication with H and G is possible, and (26) holds. This is summarized by
saying that the representation is irreducible or of minimal degree.
30. For the scalar function I/pk, the above Kalman procedure _reduces to
a trivial manipulation of the Jordan matrix Jk(P) defined in A.85. The
determinant of this matrix is pk, whereas the minor of dimension k - I
obtained by suppressing the first column and the last row is 1, because the
J.
Similarity transformations 235
submatrix is lower triangular with unit diagonal entries. Consequently, the

entry (1, k) of [Jt(p))- 1 is -1/pk. Taking the row-vectors of dimension k
x'=[l,0,···,0,0]; y' = [O, 0, · · · , 0, 1]
one selects this particular entry to obtain
1/pk = -x'[Jk(P)]-Iy (36)
and (36) is the Kalman representation of I/pk.
The representation of a unipolar matrix of the form A/ (p - Po) k with A
+
constant ofrank r is immediately deduced. By A.71, A is of the form P(lr 0) Q
with P and Q constant, hence of the form UV' where U is P restricted to its
first r columns, and where V' is Q reduced to its first r rows. By writing
A/(p -Po)k = U[(p -Po)-klr] V'
and by replacing each of the r entries (p -Po)-k of (p -Po)-klr by its repre-
sentation (36) with p replaced by p - Po one obtains the Kalman represen-
tation of A/(p -Po)k in terms of a Jordan block (direct sum of r Jordan
matrices of dimension k) of dimension r · k, equal to the degree in accordance
with 25.
31. If A is a constant square matrix of dimension n, (Pln -A)- 1 has degree n.

Since the latter matrix vanishes at infinity and is not identically singular, it
has a Kalman representation H(Pln -F)- 1 G with Hand G nonsingular.
The equality of the inverse matrices yields Pln -A= G-1 (pln -F)H- 1 • For
P= oo, the equality reduces to ln=G- 1H- 1 , so that one has Pln-A=
G- 1 (Pln -F)G. This yields a proof different from the one of A.90 for the
similarity transformation of a matrix into its Jordan form. Moreover, this
proves that the dimensions of the hyperblocks of the Jordan form of A are
the degrees of the unipolar components of (pl n -A)- 1 •
Similarity transformations
32. If one replaces the constant matrices appearing in (23) by the new
matrices
(37)
with T nonsingular of dimension s, Z remains invariant, so a representation
of the form (23) is not unique. With notation (19), the transformation (37)
can be written
(38)
and thus it becomes a similarity transformation
(39)
with
(40)
if Wis square (q = r). We therefore extend this name to the more general
case (38).
33. The converse theorem of 32 is: all irreducible representations (23) can be
deduced from each other by similarity transformations. Since J = Z( oo), it is
sufficient to deal with (27). By the expansion similar to (34), one writes (27)
as
00
Z= - L (-l)kAk/pk+I; Ak=HFkG (41)

k~O
If Z has two representations (with subscripts 1 and 2 for all matrices), the
uniqueness of the Taylor expansion in 1/p requires
H 1FfG1 = H 2 F~ G2 (42)
for all k. On the other hand, the product MN of (24) and (25) is
MN= r~~ ][G,FG, ... ,Fs-lG]= r~~ As-i]

As-2 (43 )
lHP-l lAs-1 A2s-2

For two representations one thus has
MiNi=M2N2 (44)
and all matrices Mand N have rank s for irreducible representations. There
exists at least one nonsingular submatrix M 2a of dimension s of M 2 . Let M 1a
be the submatrix of Mi formed by the same rows. From Mia Ni= M2a N2
contained in (44), one deduces
(45)
with T = M 21/ M 1a, and T is nonsingular since N2 and Ni have same
ranks. One of the equations contained in (45) is G2 = TGi. By (45), (44)
becomes MiNi = M2 TNi. If Nia is a nonsingular submatrix of dimension
s, the last equation contains MiNia = M2 TNia, hence
(46)
Finally, if one computes MFN, one obtains, because of the definition (41) of
Ak, a matrix analogue to the last member of (43) but with each subscript
of Ak raised by one unit. Consequently, one has MiF1Ni = M2 F2 N2, hence
by (45) and (46), M2 TFiNi = M2F2 TNi. This equation contains the
l
analogue equation with M 2 and N1 replaced by some nonsingular sub-

matrices, and one thus has TFi =F2 T. This relation, with (45) and (46),
forms the announced similarity transformation.
34. If Z is a real matrix, it has an irreducible real representation, and all such
representations are deduced from one another by real similarity transformations. The
reality of the representation means that the submatrices of ( 19) are real.
This is obvious for J = Z( oo). On the other hand, the derivation of the
separate Kalman's representations for the unipolar components of Z intro-
duces complex matrices at complex poles, so that the Kalman canonic
representation is not real. By the previous theorem, a real representation, if
it exists, must be obtainable by a suitable similarity transformation. This can
be performed separately on pairs of unipolar components corresponding to
conjugate poles. For such a pair, the matrices F, G, H belonging to conjugate
poles are themselves conjugate, if the original matrix is real, and their
combination according to (28) produces combined matrices (noted with sub-
script c) given by
He= [H, H*]
Fe=[~ J*]
By means ofa direct sum of transformations (A.74), that is, with
-jls]. y-1 = 1' (47)

jls '
one obtains the real representation
H1 = He T = j2 [Re H, Im HJ (48)
F1 = T- 1Fe T = [ Re F ImF] (49)

-ImF ReF
(50)
35. If W of (19) is skew-hermitian (hence square), so are F and J, whereas

one has G = R. Matrix (23) is then skew para-hermitian. This class is of
interest since (19) is skew-hermitian when it is the hybrid matrix of a con-
stant lossless n-port (with n = s + r, q = r). Matrix (23) is then the impedance
matrix of a lossless r-port, and the representation (23) gives a realization of
this r-port as an n-port closed on s unit capacitances. It is thus natural to

call (23) a lossless representation when Wis skew-hermitian. If K, hence T, is
unitary in (40), (39) is equivalent to
(51)
and W1 is also skew-hermitian. Hence a lossless representation remains lossless
by a unitary transformation.
36. Conversely, if a matrix admits an irreducible lossless representation, all other

such representations are deduced by unitary transformations defined by (51) and
(40). From W= -Wand W1 = -W1, that is RwR-1 = -K-1 WK or
KWK- 1 =K-1 WK, one deduces, by the operationK··· R,
UW=WU (52)
i where
U=KK (53)
l is positive definite. From (40) one deduces
where
U= V+In
V= T'l'
(54)
(55)
f
is also positive definite, even strictly, since Tis nonsingular. In terms of the
submatrices (19), (52) becomes
~] = [~
yielding in particular
VF=FV; VG=G
One deduces successively
VFG=FVG=FG
VF2G = VF(FG) =FV(FG) =F(VFG) =F 2G
and
VFkG=FkG
With notation (24), these equations are combined into
(V-I 8 )N=0
Since N is nonsingular for an irreducible representation, this matrix equation
has no other solution than V = 18 , and Tis then unitary by (55).
37. Since (47) is unitary, theorems 35 and 36 apply to real, hence simply
skew, representations W of a real para-skew Z, and the unitary transfor-
mation K becomes real, hence orthogonal. To conclude, if a matrix admits
an irreducible real lossless representation, all such representations are deduced by
orthogonal transformations.
38. Let Z be the impedance matrix of a real lossless n-port, without poles at
infinity, and consider its partial fraction expansion of the form (7.3) with
Hoo= 0. In the realization of 7.35 of each term
Hi
Zt=--.- (56)
P-Jwi
+
of Z, we have set Ht= Nt ~i Ni with Ni= At }Bt. Moreover, Ni is a Gauss
matrix within symmetric relabeling if the diagonalization is performed in
accordance with A.37. This implies that Ai is upper triangular and that Bt is
upper triangular with zeros on the main diagonal, within relabeling. On the other
hand, ~i is real positive of rank Ti= rank Ht, and one can enter into Nt
and Nt the square roots of the nonzero entries of ~i, thus replacing ~i by
Ir;. If one still designates by Ni the matrix thus modified and reduced to its
first rt rows, one rewrites (56) as
(57)
and this is a Kalman representation of Zt with
Hi= -Ni= -Ai +}B't

(58)
We next combine two conjugate terms (57) in accordance with (48-50).

If one writes At instead of At J'i,
and similarly for Bt, the new combined Ht is
(59)
and the new Gt is its negative transpose, whereas the new Fi is
(60)
Kalman's representation of Z is obtained by assembling the partial repre-

sentations according to (28), not forgetting a possible contribution from the
isolated real term H 0 /p with Ho= -A 0 real and F 0 = 0. Since J = Ko in

(7.3), the assembled matrix (19) 1s
0 0 0 0 0 Ao
--i--1 0 -wilr 1 0 0 ------- -~~:-

--~--1•------- w1lr 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
w2lr 2
0
-w2lr 2
0
,_ _ _ _ _ --~-i:-- (61)
-------------1 ________ ,·-------------· ------------·
,,a
---:
A
-
l
0
'
j -A~ B'1 -Af B'2 Ko
1 where the partition into FGH J is indicated by solid separations and the
i'~~: partition into subblocks (59-60) by dotted separations. Since (61) is skew,
the Kalman canonic representation of a positive para-skew matrix is a real lossless
i~:.
I~!
representation.
[Ji 39. In accordance with 27, the real lossless n-port of impedance matrix (7.3)
is realized by terminating all ports except the last n of the network of hybrid
matrix (61) on unit capacitances. The part of (61) corresponding to Wi can
be split into
0
0 (62)
where the last matrix is the hybrid matrix of a transformer network of ratio
matrix
(63)
whereas the first matrix is a gyrator admittance matrix. Since each gyrator
is to be terminated on two unit capacitances, the combined admittance
matrix of the network on which the shunt ports of the transformer network
(63) are closed is a direct sum of matrices of type (7.38), except for minor
details of notation. Finally, all constituent networks are to be connected in
series with Ko, so that the realization <if a lossless impedance matrix based on its
Kalman canonic representation where the internal ports are closed on capacitances
coincides with the canonic synthesis <if 7.35.
L
Equivalence of lossless n-ports 241
40. In the reciprocal case, Bi = 0, and this opens one port of the gyrator
shunted by a capacitance at each port. One shunt capacitance can be trans-
formed into its dual (a series inductance) at the other side of the gyrator;
the gyrator then transforms the open circuit at its free port into a short
circuit which connects the inductance on the capacitance to produce an
antiresonant circuit. This produces the canonic realization described in 7.36.
We have thus proved that the realization of a lossless reciprocal n-port based on
the canonic Kalman representation of its impedance matrix coincides with the canonic
realization.

41. Let us consider any realization of a real lossless n-port having an admit-
tance matrix. In the case of a reciprocal n-port, the most general realization
is necessarily of the type discussed in 4.53 consisting of an enlarged r-port of
admittance matrix (4.58) with G = 0 (since resistances are excluded) whose
last r - n ports are left open. Consequently, all realizations of a real reciprocal
lossless n-port of prescribed admittance matrix Ya will be obtained if one
finds all matrices
Y=pC+p- 1S (64)
with C and S constant and symmetric positive definite, yielding the pre-
scribed Ya by (4.53).
The problem for non-reciprocal n-ports is analogous if one only considers
realizations containing ideal transformers, gyrators, and capacitances (for
inductances are redundant). The contribution of the gyrators to (4.58) gives
a skew matrix G, and (64) is simply replaced by
(65)
with G skew and C symmetric positive definite.

Clearly, the solutions to the above problems are not unique, for Y Ye+
is a solution with Yi[ Ye is an arbitrary matrix of the same form, (64) or (65).
We therefore only investigate all solutions of minimum dimension. These
also are not unique since Howitt transformations of the form (4.54-55)
yield new matrices giving the same Ya in (4.53). Our purpose in the next
paragraphs is to prove that such Howitt traniformations give all solutions of
minimum dimension, both in the reciprocal case (64) and in the nonreciprocal
case (65). The proofs are given in 45-46 and 42-43, respectively.
42. Let us first note that we already know one realization (65) for any real
lossless Ya. If p Caa denotes the principal value at infinity of Ya, the matrix
!I/
11
Ya -eaaP is regular at infinity and admits a real lossless Kalman repre-

sentation of the form (23) where W defined by (19) is skew. By comparison
between (23) and (4.53),
Y-[peaa
- G
+J G' ] (66)
Pls +F
is a solution. It is a solution of minimum dimension since s has the smallest
possible value, deg (Ya -eaaP)- Moreover, any other Kalman representa-
tion of Ya - eaaP induces a Howitt transformation on (66), for (51) with
K real of the form (40) changes (66) into (4.55) with P = 0 and Q = T' in
(4.54). Since Howitt transformations form a group, and since the last remark
shows that the orthogonal transformations of the Kalman representation
form a subgroup of the Howitt group, the theorem stated at the end of 41
will be proved for the nonreciprocal case if we show that any solution Y of
minimal dimension can be Howitt-transformed into a solution ef the form (66).
43. Let
y = [peaa + Gaa peab - G~b] (n) (67)
peab + Gba pebb + Gbb (r - n)
be some solution (65). We first prove that if (67) is of minimal dimension, ebb
is nonsingular. Let q be the rank of ebb. By a Howitt transformation with
P = 0, one can reduce ebb to Iq +or-n-q. Since e is positive definite, its
last r - n - q rows and columns are then zero by A.40 and (67) has the form
pea(J -c;a -c;a] (n)
plq + Gflll -c;fJ (q) (68)
Gyfl GYY (r -n -q)
By a Howitt transformation with P = 0 and Q operating only on the last
r - n - q rows and columns, one can transform the skew matrix Gyy into a
direct sum of gyrator blocks Q and a zero matrix, so that the last matrix row
of (68) becomes
(y)
0
0 ~]
ii the transformation on the last matrix column being similar. By a Howitt
i.i
transformation with Q = lr-n-q and a suitable P, one can subtract multiples
i of Q from Gm and Gep to reduce these submatrices to zero. The resulting
matrix (68) is then the direct sum ofa submatrix and ofQ, thus showing that
fi
_Jj
Q has no effect on Ya and that the solution Y was not of the minimal dimen-
! sion. Let us thus return to (68) with Gyy = 0. A Howitt transformation with
P = 0 and Q = Qp + Qy changes Gyp into Qy Gyp Qp and can thus be chosen
to transform Gyp into its canonic form which is a unit matrix of some dimen-
sion t bordered by zeros. A Howitt transformation Q = I r-n-q and a suitable P
can then subtract a multiple of It from Gya in order to reduce its first trows
to zero. The last matrix row of (68) then takes the form
(/3) (y)
It
0
0
0 ~] (69)
When the ports corresponding to the rows of (69) are opened, the first t
open circuits acting through It short-circuit the elements connected to ports
corresponding to the first t columns of (3, thus showing that the matrix is not
of minimal dimension. On the other hand, one must have G11 a = 0, since
otherwise the last matrix row of (69) would produce the homogeneous rela-
tion G11 a Va = 0 between the port voltages when the corresponding ports are
opened, and this contradicts the existence of the admittance matrix Ya.
As a conclusion, the last r - n - q rows and columns of (68) vanish, and the
lemma is proved.
Returning to (67) where q = r - n and where Cbb is now strictly positive
definite, we apply A.67 to transform simultaneously Cbb into lq and Gbb into
a direct sum Q of gyrator blocks. Matrix (67} then takes the form
[PCaa + Gaa PCab - Gba] (n) (70)

pCab + Gba plq + n
(q)
A Howitt transformation with Q = Iq and a suitable P subtracts a multiple
of lq from Cab to reduce it to zero, and produces a form similar to (66),
except thats is replaced by q. Since s has been assumed to have the smallest
possible value, one has q > s. If q = s, the form reached is (66) and the
theorem is proved. If q> s, a further reduction is possible, for the submatrix
playing the role of G cannot have a rank larger than s: if G has rank t,
then (24) has rank t at least, and (26) yields s > t. Consequently, one has
q > s, some q - s rows of G are linear combinations of the remaining s rows
and can be reduced to zero by a Howitt transformation, and similarly q - s
columns of -G'. These q - s rows and columns have no effect on Ya and
can be deleted; the resulting matrix is (66) with q = s. This ends the proof
of the last statement of 42.
44. Let us return to the canonic Kalman representation of a real lossless

immittance matrix, where (19) is (61). With the notations
A'= [Ai, A;, ... ]
B' = [Bi, B;, .. .] (71)
Q = w1lr1 + w2 lr 2 +···
where Q is nonsingular, a rearranged form of (61) is
0 0 0 Ao
0 0 -n A
0 n 0 -B (72)
- A'0 -A' B' Ko
In the reciprocal case, one has B = 0 and Ko = 0, so that the submatrices

occurring in (23) are of the form
G= [Ao]
g; H= -G'; J=O; pis+F=
[PI~ a
The matrix (pl 8 +F)- 1 is easily computed in partitioned form as the direct
sum of p- 1 la and of
(plb +p-1Q2)-1 [-~p-1
Finally, (23) is evaluated as

p-lA 0A 0 +A'(pib +p-1Q2)-1A (73)
and the Kalman canonic representation of a real reciprocal lossless immittance matrix
is of the form (73). Moreover, except for relabeling, Ao is upper triangular
and A is composed of upper-triangular blocks A 1 for each distinct w 1 , m
accordance with (71) and a remark of 38.
45. The principal part at infinity of (73) is A'Q- 2 Ap. Adding and sub-
tracting this term, one rewrites (73) as
p-lAoAo +PA'Q-2A -(pA'Q-l)(pib +r1n2)-l(Q-lAp)
Identifying this with (4.53), one obtains
Y= [p-lAoAo+PA'Q-2A A'Q-lp J
(74)
1 Ap n- plb + p-1Q2
Consequently, any Foster matrix Ya whose principal part at infinity is

A'Q- 2 Ap is realizable as the (n + b)-port of admittance matrix (74) whose
last b ports are opened. If the principal part at infinity of Ya is p Caa, the
matrix Ya+ p(A'Q- 2A - Caa) has the principal part A'Q- 2Ap, and the
realization of Ya is the (n + b)-port of admittance matrix
(75)
Since (75) is of the form (64), we have found one solution to the problem
of 41 in the reciprocal case. Since Howitt transformations form a group, the
theorem stated at the end of 41 will be proved in the reciprocal case if we
show that any solution Y of minimal dimension can be Howitt-transformed into the
form (75), with the particular forms of A and Ao mentioned at the end of 44.
46. Let
peab + p-ISab] (n)
(76)
pebb+p-lSbb (r-n)
be some solution (64). As in 43, we first prove that both ebb and Sbb are
nonsingular if (76) is of minimal dimension. Since ebb and Sbb are positive
definite, they can simultaneously be diagonalized by a Howitt transfor-
mation on Y. Since both submatrices may, however, be singular in principle,
we have to partition the ports of subscript b into the following parts:
subscript /3, for nonzero diagonal entries in both ebb and Sbb
subscript y, for zero entries in sbb but not in ebb
subscript 8, for zero entries in ebb but not in Sbb
subscript e, for zero entries in both ebb and sbb
Owing to A.40, matrix (76) takes the form
pe~/3 + p-lsafJ (77)

pe~y
p-IS~B
where the entries of subscript e are all zero and have been omitted, and
where the strictly positive diagonal form of S/3/3 has been noted Q 2 . A Howitt
transformation adding suitable multiples of ply to peay reduces this sub-
matrix and its transpose to zero, and the isolated submatrix ply then has
no effect on Ya, thus showing that (76) is not of minimal order unless ly does
not exist. A similar reasoning holds for p - 1 I 6, and this completes the proof.
For ebb and Sbb nonsingular, (77) reduces to its first two matrix rows
+
and columns. The addition of a suitable multiple of p I /3 p - 1 Q 2 top ea/3
+ p- 1Saf3 may then reduce Sa/3 to zero, since Q 2 is nonsingular by hypoth-
esis. The resulting matrix has the form
(78)
Let Wi denote the distinct diagonal entries of Q and let qi be the multiplicity
+
of wi, so that Q = w 1 1q, w 2 1q, +···.
Consider the submatrix (p w; /p) 1q, +
of Y/l/l in (78) and let p Ci be the corresponding submatrix of p C~/l of dimen-

sions (qi · n). If Ti= rank Ci is smaller than qi, some qi - Ti rows of Ci can
be reduced to zero, as in the last reduction step of 43, and the corresponding
rows and columns deleted. If one still denotes by Ci the reduced matrix of
dimensions (ri · n), the pertinent part of (78) takes the form
pc;, ] (n)
(p + wTfp) 1, (ri)
'
and Ci has rank Ti. By A.51, an orthogonal matrix U exists which reduces to
the upper triangular form some nonsingular submatrix of dimension Ti of
Ci, and UCi is then upper triangular within relabeling. Since U is orthogonal,
+
the corresponding Howitt transformation does not alter (p wTfp) 1, . The
Ii submatrix finally produced is identical to the corresponding submltrix of
) (75) for Ai/wi = UCi. To complete the identification with (75), one may
represent the last form obtained for Saa in (78) as A~A 0 of (75), and this is
obtained by the Gauss algorithm. This ends the proof of the last statement
of 45.
47. In 4.54 we considered the realization of an n-port of prescribed impe-

dance matrix Za by means of an enlarged r-port of impedance matrix Z
whose last (r - n)-ports are shorted, and where Z is of the form (65) or (64)
for real lossless (reciprocal) n-ports. By duality, theorem 41 also holds, and
Howitt transformations give all equivalent lossless n-ports deduced from
r-ports of minimum dimension.
48. The Kalman canonic realizations of a lossless n-port of degree s contains

s reactive elements, hence the minimum number. Since a Howitt trans-
formation does not alter the rank ofC in (64-65), nor of Sin (64), the total
number of reactive elements is invariant, and Howitt transformations give all
equivalent lossless n-ports having the minimum total number of reactive elements. More-
over, the ranks of the C and S matrices are separately invariant in all reciprocal
realizations. This means that in all realizations of a lossless reciprocal n-port with
the minimum total number of reactive elements, the number of inductances and the
number of capacitances are separatef:y invariant.
.[i 49. Let Di= rank Hi in the partial expansion (7.5) ofa Foster matrix. Since
ti
each pole is simple, ( 14) reduces to
i I
'
deg Z = Do + 2I;Di + Doo
On the other hand, the first and last term of (7.5) have been realized in 7.36
by capacitances alone and inductances alone, whereas each intermediate
term required as many inductances as capacitances. Consequently, the total
(79)
J
number ,\ of inductances and the total number y of capacitances in the

canonic realizations are
respectively, and one has

,\ - y = 800 - 80 (80)
50. We now relate the invariant (80) to the scattering matrix S of Z. Near
p = 0, the principal value of Z is Ho/P and the n-port reduces to a trans-
former n-port of rank 80 closed on 80 capacitances. These become open
circuits at p = 0, and the n-port reduces to the transformer n-port alone.
The trace of S(0) is then 280 - n by 6.32, and this is also the signature ao of
S(0) by the last remark of A.64. Similarly, one has aoo = 2800 - n, hence, by
difference,
,\ -y = (aoo -ao)/2 (81)
51. In the synthesis of lossless nonreciprocal n-ports, capacitances and
inductances are interchangeable through gyrators, but their total minimum
number is invariant. We now wish to find realizations using both kinds of
reactive elements but in which the total number of gyrators is minimum.5
Any realization can be considered as a lossless constant (n+ s)-port of skew
hybrid matrix H withs ports closed on unit inductances or unit capacitances.
Moreover, both kinds of terminations correspond to Eq. (20) provided
capacitances are connected at shunt ports and inductances at series ports;
thus all realizations can be based on a Kalman representation of hybrid
matrix (19), but with different partitions between series and shunt ports.
If the hybrid matrix of (3.8) is skew, so are Haa and Hbb, and one has
Hab = -H~b. The matrix is the sum of three skew matrices
~] + [~ 0
Hbb
]+[ -Hab
o, (82)
If the partition is conformal with the separation into shunt and series ports,
the first matrix is a skew admittance and its realization by 7.32 requires
½[rank Haa] gyrators, where [n] denotes the largest integer contained in n.
Similarly, the second matrix is an impedance matrix and requires½[ rank Hbb]
gyrators, whereas the third matrix is of the type (3.10) representing a trans-
former network. Thus, the total number ofgyrators necessary to realize a skew hybrid
matrix is
½[rank Haa] + ½[rank Hbb] (83)
where the subscripts a and b refer to shunt and series ports, respectively.
The Kalman canonic representation of a lossless matrix has given the
skew matrix (72), and the problem is to partition it so as to minimize (83),
the partition now being allowed to differ from the one indicated in dotted
lines in (72), since the last partition leads to a realization using only capa-
citances. Consider the partition
0
0
(84)
0
-A~
where Haa = 0, whereas

-BJ + [O
0 B'
(85)
Owing to the form (71) of Band to the form of the blocks Bi established in 38,
I B has at most n - I nonzero columns. On the other hand, the last matrix
I
in (85) has only n nonzero rows. By (A.16) one then has rank Hbb :S: 2n - 1,
hence rank Hbb < 2n - 2 since the rank of a skew matrix is even. Any par-
tition other than the one indicated in (84) makes Haa# 0, hence generally
increases rank Haa; although the dimension of Hbb is then decreased, the
argument by which its rank was evaluated in (85) does not yield more
favorable results in general, so that the partition (84) is the one which
minimizes (83) in general. Since the value of (83) thus obtained is :S:n - 1,
we have proved that any real lossless n-port can be realized with the minimum
number of reactive elements and at most n - I gyrators.
Explicit formulas for the degree 6

52. Let Z(p) be a rational matrix vanishing at infinity and let m be the
degree of the last common denominator g(p) of the entries of Z; the poly-
nomial g(p) may be assumed to be monic and is written
m
g(p) = L aipm-i; ao = 1 (86)
i=O
Since Z accepts an expansion of form (41), the numerator of Z is (41)
multiplied by (86), that is,
m . oo (-l)kAk m oo
~ a pm-i ~ _ _ _ = ~ ~ (-l)kAkaipm-i-k-1
i~'o i k~O pk+l i~O k~O
With u = k + i, this numerator becomes

oo m
L (-l)kpm-1-u L (-l)iAu-tai
u=O i=O
Explicit formulas for the degree 249
Since Zg is a polynomial matrix, the coefficients of the negative powers of p

(corresponding to u> m) must vanish, thus
m
L (-I)U-iAu-iai = 0 (u=m,m+I, ... )
i=O
or
m
Au= - L (-I)iatAu-i (u=m,m+I, ... ) (87)
i=l
so that all coefficients above Am-I of the expansion (41) are identical linear
combinations of the m preceding ones. If Z has degree s (>m necessarily
since Z has m finite poles), it has an irreducible representation such that M
of (25) has s columns and ranks, whereas N of (24) has s rows and the same
rank. By the Binet-Cauchy theorem applied to the product (43), MN has
then ranks. Since s > m, and since any matrix row of (43) below the one
starting with Am-1, Am, ... is a linear combination of the preceding matrix
rows, it can be suppressed without altering the rank of (43). The same holds
true for the column matrices, and (43) still has rank s if reduced to the
submatrix
~
Ao
AI (88)
Am-1
Finally, if the entries of a rational matrix Z vanishing at if!finity have a least common
denominator of degree m, the degree cif Z is the rank of (88) where the matrices At are
the coefficients of the expansion (41 ) of Z.
53. As a corollary, the degree of the polynomial matrix
K(p)=Kopm+K1pm- 1+ · · · +Km-IP+Km (89)

is the rank cif
0 0
[ K1
Ko Ko 0
~~ KI Ko (90)
!.I
T=
Km-I Km-2 Km-3
By 10, the degree of (89) is identical to the degree of K(p) - Km, which by
the substitution of l /p to p becomes
Km-I Km-2 K1 Ko
-+-+···+-+-
p p2 pm-I pm
(91)
This is a unipolar matrix having a pole of order m at p = 0, and (91) is a

finite form of the expansion (41) with Ao= Km-1, A1 = Km-2, · · ·, Am-1 =
Ko, and Ai = 0 for i > m. Matrix (88) then reduces to (90) if the rows
are arranged in the opposite order.
54. The rank r of (90) is certainly not larger than the sum of the ranks ri of
its row submatrices ri where
ro=Ko
r1 = [K1, Ko] (92)
r m-1 = [Km-1, Km-2, ... , Ko]
We now prove that one has exactly
m-1
i
r= L ri (93)
j
i=O
if the matrices Ki are hermitianfor i = 0, 1, ... , m - 1 and (not strictly) positive

..
'
'
definite for i = I, 2, ... , m - 1. Consider the system Tx = 0 where Tis (90)
and where x is partitioned as required. The system becomes
Koxo =0
K1xo + Kox1 = 0 (94)
K2xo +K1x1 + Kox2 = 0
The first equation also gives xoKo = 0. The second equation premultiplied
by x 0 then gives x 0 K 1x 0 = 0, hence x 0 K 1 = 0 for K 1 is p.d. The third equation
premultiplied by xo then similarly gives .xo K2 = 0. Continuing in this way,
one groups all results into
(95)
On the other hand, the transpose of the results thus obtained, that is,
Koxo = K1xo = K2xo = · · · = 0 reduces (94) to
Kox1=0
K1x1 + Kox2 = 0
a system similar to (94) but with Xi replaced by Xi+l and one equation less.
The same reasoning leads then to
x1rm-2 = 0 (96)
The maximum number of parameters of n-ports of given degree 251
instead of (95). By recurrence, one thus shows that (94) is equivalent to the
separate systems
(97)
so the rank of (94) is the sum of the ranks of the partial systems (97) as
announced.
55. As a corollary, we prove that the expression (4. 74) related to the degree
ofa Kirchhoff network, where MRc is (4.62), can be replaced by
deg det (S +Gp+ Cp) 2 = rank C + rank [G, C] (98)
By (4.59), one has rank C = rank Mc, so that (98) is established if we prove
rank [G, C] = rank [MR, Mc]
By (4.59), one also has
M'
[G,C] = [MR, Mc] [ OR
and this establishes

rank [G, C] < rank [MR, Mc]
so that is sufficient to prove the opposite inequality or, equivalently, to prove
that
rank C + rank [G, C] :2: deg det (S +Gp+ Cp 2) (99)
By 54, since G and Care symmetric positive definite, the first member of (99)
+ +
is the degree of the matrix S Gp Cp 2 , and this is surely not smaller than
the degree of its determinant, owing to 9.

56. We wish to compute the maximum number N of independent param-
eters characterizing an n-port of degree m, taking into account various possible
restrictions such as reciprocity, reality, or losslessness and thus extending to
n-ports the results obtained for one-ports in 5.5. This number N is the
minimum number of elements required to synthesize the corresponding
n-port, and at least m of these elements must be reactive.
57. Consider a general n-port of degree m characterized by its hybrid

matrix which is a square rational matrix of dimension n and degree m. A
matrix H(p) of this type is the sum of a constant matrix Ho and of a number
of unipolar matrices corresponding to distinct poles Pt, whose degrees add
up to m. The most general case is obtained when the variety of poles is

maximum, that is, when there are m unipolar components each of degree l.
One then has
m H,
H(p) =Ho+ L --
i=1P-P1.
(100)
and each (generally complex) residue matrix H1, has rank 1, and contains
2 (2n - 1) real parameters by A.25. Adding the two real parameters of Pt ,
one obtains 4n real parameters per term of (100). On the other hand, Ho
contains 2n 2 real parameters (this is the maximum value when its rank is n),
+
and this gives a total of 2n(n 2m) real parameters or, equivalently, of
N=n(n +2m) (101)
complex parameters. For a real matrix, each partial fraction corresponding
to a realp1, (thus a real H1,), has 2n instead of4n real parameters; ifp, and H,
are complex, the real number of parameters is doubled in one fraction, but
the conjugate fraction contains no new parameters; so the same total (101)
is obtained in terms ofreal parameters.
58. The hybrid matrix of a reciprocal n-port satisfies (3.25) which expresses
that the matrix 0H is symmetric. Consequently, each 0H1, (i = 0, ... , m) in
( 100) is symmetric and of the same rank as Hi. A real symmetric matrix of
rank 1 contains n parameters by A.25, and this gives n + I parameters for
each real term of ( 100); the_ same result per term is again obtained for a
pair of complex conjugate terms. Finally, if Ho is real symmetric of rank n,
+
it contains n(n 1)/2 parameters, and this is the maximum value, as above.
This gives a total of
N = (m +n/2)(n 1) + (102)
real parameters for a real reciprocal n-port and the same number of complex
parameters for a complex reciprocal n-port.
59. For a lossless n-port, all poles Pi are imaginary and have hermitian
residue matrices. Such a matrix ofrank 1 depends on 2n - 1 real parameters;
adding the real parameter of Pi = jwi , one obtains a total of 2n real para-
meters per term in the sum (100). On the other hand, Ho must be skew-
hermitian and thus it contains n2 real parameters. Finally, the maximum
number of real parameters ofa complex lossless n-port of degree mis (101).
60. In the case a real lossless n-port, the poles occur in conjugate pairs with
conjugate residue matrices, and the number of parameters per unit of degree
is thus halved, becoming n. If m is odd, one pole must occur at zero or
infinity and have a real symmetric residue matrix; such a matrix of rank 1
also contains n parameters, so that the count is not affected. On the other
hand, H 0 is real skew and contains n(n -1)/2 parameters. Finally, the
maximum number of parameters of a real lossless n-port of degree m is
N=n[m+(n-1)/2] (103)
61. We next consider a complex lossless reciprocal n-port. All poles are
imaginary and have p.d. hermitian residue matrices of rank 1, hence of the
form uu by (A.25), satisfying (3.25). Partitioning the vector u into ua and
ub, the matrix uu becomes
(104)
and satisfies (3.25) if Ua is real and ub imaginary. Consequently, the vector u

has a total of n real parameters; adding the imaginary parameter of Pi , one
obtains n + I real parameters per unit of degree. On the other hand, to a
skew-hermitian matrix Ho depending on n2 real parameters, the condition
(3.25) imposes n(n -1)/2 relations (for the condition is invariant by trans-
position and is trivially satisfied for its diagonal entries), so that n(n + 1)/2
parameters remain. Finally, the maximum number of real parameters of a
complex lossless reciprocal n-port is (102).
62. In the case of real lossless reciprocal n-ports, the imaginary poles occur
in conjugate pairs with conjugate residue matrices, thus the number of
parameters per unit of degree is halved, compared to the previous case, to
become (n + l) /2. If m is odd, an isolated pole at zero or infinity must be
present, and its residue matrix is of the form (104) but real, thus with Ub = O;
the corresponding number of parameters is r where r is the dimension of ua.
On the other hand, Ho is the hybrid matrix of an ideal transformer n-port
of the same rank r as the one considered in the partition of (104) imposed
by 0; consequently, Ho contains r(n - r) parameters which are the entries
of Nin (3.10). Form even (in the absence of pole at zero or infinity), the
poles contribute to a total of m(n + l) /2 parameters, and r must be chosen
so as to maximize r(n - r); for n even, the maximum n2 /4 occurs for r = n/2;
for n odd, the maximum (n 2 - 1) /4 occurs for r = (n + l) /2. For m odd, the
n - I imaginary poles contribute to a total of (m - I)(n + 1)/2 parameters,
and r must be chosen so as to maximize the total remaining contribution
r+r(n-r); for n odd, the maximum (I +n) 2 /4 occurs for r=(l +n)/2;
for n even, the maximum n(2 + n)/4 occurs for r = n/2. Finally, the maximum
number of parameters of a real lossless reciprocal n-port of degree m is
(n2 - 1)/4 for n odd
N=m(n+I)/2+ ( n2 /4 for even n, even m (105)
(n 2 - 2)/4 for even n, odd m.
63. The results of 57-62 are summarized in the following table giving the
number of real parameters in the various cases.
Complex Real
general 2n(2m +n) n(2m +n)
lossless n(2m + n) n[m + (n -1)/2]
reciprocal 2(n + l)(m + n/2) (n + l)(m +n/2)
lossless reciprocal (n + l)(m +n/2) (n + l)m/2 + · ·· cfr. (105)
64. A comparison of these results suggests the following remarks :

(a) Losslessness or reality, occurring independently (whether reciprocity
is considered or not) halve the numbers of parameters. This is because the
corresponding algebraic restrictions, H(p) = [H)p*)]* for reality, and
H(p) = [H( -p*)]* for losslessness, are obviously similar.
(b) All expressions are linear in the degree m. This is compatible with
the possibility of an iterative synthesis procedure realizing an n-port of
degree m as some 2n-port of degree 1 closed on an n-port of degree m - I,
of the same class as the n-port of degree m to be realized. Since, in such a
synthesis procedure, an arbitrary n-port of degree O of the same class can be
extracted from the output of the 2n-port of degree 1 and inserted into the
n-port of degree m - I, the number of parameters to be attributed to the
2n-port degree 1 is the coefficient of m in the expression giving the number
of parameters of the n-port of the class considered, that is, its number of
parameters per unit of degree.
(c) The number of real parameters per unit of degree is 2n for general
real n-ports and n, in accordance with remark (a), for lossless real n-ports.
It is doubled for complex n-ports of both types. All the above values are
proportional to n, whereas this is not true for any of the expressions per-
taining to reciprocal n-ports.
(d) The synthesis of an n-port mentioned in (b) involves a 2n-port, thus
a subnetwork having twice the number of ports, whereas its number of
parameters per unit of degree is the same as for the n-port to be synthesized.
Consequently, the 2n-port can be submitted to additional restrictions. Since,
by (c), doubling the number of ports doubles the number of parameters per
unit of degree in all nonreciprocal cases, whereas, by (a), imposing loss-
lessness halves this number one may, in principle, expect that a (real) n-port
of degree m is realizable as a (real) lossless 2n-port of degree 1 closed on a
(real) n-port of degree m - I, whereas a similar synthesis is impossible if
reciprocity is required for all constituents.
(e) If the synthesis mentioned in (d) is possible, it leads, by recurrence,
to the realization of a (real) n-port of degree mas a (real) lossless 2n-port of
degree m closed on a (real) n-port of degree zero. Moreover, since a (real)

n-port of degree O can be realized as a (real) lossless 2n-port of degree 0
closed on n separate (real) resistances, the final result is a (real) lossless 2n-
port of degree m closed on n (real) resistances, but is not unique since there
exist lossless 2n-ports of degree O which transform n separate resistances into
n separate resistances. One may check, however, that such a synthesis is
compatible with the number of parameters involved in the various subnet-
works, taking into account the freedom still available because of the last
remark. It is sufficient to discuss the real case, for the number of real para-
meters is doubled throughout in the complex case. For the lossless 2n-port
of degree m, the number n(2m + 2n - 1) is deduced from ( 103) by replacing
n by 2n. Form= 0, this number becomes n(2n -1), whereas the condition
that a termination on n resistances produces n resistances imposes n(n -1)
relations (all nondiagonal entries of the input impedance matrix must
vanish). The remaining number of degrees of freedom is n(2n - 1) -n(n - 1)
+
= n2• The total number of parameters is thus n(2m 2n - 1) for the 2n-port
of degree m, plus n for the terminating resistances, minus n2 for the non-
uniqueness of the realization. The total is ( 101) as required. The announced
synthesis will be achieved in Chap. 9 for one-ports and Chap. 11 for n-ports.
(f) For (real) reciprocal n-ports an iterative synthesis is compatible
with (b), but the 2n-port of degree 1 to be extracted for each degree reduction
by one unit cannot be required to be (real) lossless reciprocal, as mentioned
at the end of (d). The number of (real) parameters per unit of degree is
n + 1 for a (real) reciprocal n-port and is halved to (n + 1) /2 by losslessness.
For a double number of ports, this number becomes n + ½and is too short
by ½ with respect to the requirement n + I. The right number of para-
meters is obtained, however, if one resistance is added at every second step
of the iterative procedure, as was the case in the Brune synthesis of 5.34.
This synthesis will be extended to n-ports in Chap. 10.
(g) For constant n-ports, the synthesis procedures of 7.30-32 were
based on the Gauss diagonalization by conjunctive transformations, which
was also the basis for the parameter count in A.25. Similarly, the procedures
of7.35-36 for lossless n-ports were based on the Gauss diagonalization of the
residue matrices of the unipolar components of a partial fraction expansion,
which was also the basis of the parameter count in 59, 60, and 62. Conse-
quently, all syntheses of Chap. 7 use the minimum number of elements and
are canonic.
chapter 9
Lossless 2-ports
One-port synthesis by all-pass extraction

1. By remarks (d) and (e) of 8.64, we expect a passive one-port of degree
m to be realizable as a lossless 2-port of degree I terminated on a passive
one-port of degree m - I. By recurrence, one then obtains a realization of a
passive one-port of degree m as a lossless 2n-port of degree m terminated on
one resistance; moreover, the lossless 2-port of degree m appears as a cascade
of m lossless 2-ports of degree 1. This shows that the iterative synthesis of
passive one-ports is related with the problem of the cascade decomposition
of lossless 2-ports. 1 On the other hand, it is sometimes simpler to obtain the
lossless 2-port of degree m, involved in the realization of a passive one-port,
in nondecomposed form; the corresponding global synthesis is studied in the
second half of this chapter. Finally, the lossless 2-port involved in the men-
tioned realizations is generally nonreciprocal, so the synthesis of a passive
one-port of degree m by means of a reciprocal lossless 2-port closed on one
resistance can generally be achieved only if the 2-port is allowed to have a
degree larger than m. We will also discuss such iterative and global reciprocal
realizations and the related cascade decomposition of lossless reciprocal
2-ports.
+
2. Consider an arbitrary point Po= oco jwo of the right half-plane (oco > 0)
and the corresponding value of a positive function Z(p)
Z(Po) = Zo = Ro + jXo (1)
256
One-port synthesis by all-pass extraction 257
One has Ro~ 0. As a particular case of 7.11, the equality is only possible
if R vanishes identically, and Z(p) is then para-odd. Excluding this case,
we have Ro > 0. The positive function
Za(P) = Z(p) - JXo (2)
takes the value Ro at Po, so that the corresponding reflectance s(p) with
respect to Ro vanishes at this point. By (2), this reflectance
(3)
is also the reflectance of Z with respect to z;

(note the conjugate sign),
owing to (6.8). By theorem 6.21, one may factor s into s1s2 where s 2 is
(6.37), and s1 is the reflectance of a positive function
Z1(P) = Ro 1 +
si(P) (4)
l -s1(P)
where
Z - Zo p + P6
S1(P) = s(p)/s2(P) = z + zt. p - Po (5)
The factoring of s is (7.80) and corresponds to the realization of Za by the

circuit of Fig. 7.18, where all impedances are multiplied by R 0 • Since (6.37)
is the negative of (6.35), z2 is the dual of (7.85), so Z2 is an inductance
Ro/rxo in series with an imaginary resistance -Jwo Ro/rxo. Finally, by (2),
Z is obtained by adding the imaginary resistance JX0 in series, and this
2
1
Z(p)►
2'
1'u----
Fm. 9.1
258 9. Lossless 2-ports
gives the circuit of Fig. I. We have thus proved that any passive immittance
can be realized as Fig. I where Z1 is again a passive immittance.
3. Note that the extraction embodied in Fig. I can be made at an arbitrary

point Po in Re p > 0; the extraction only yields interesting synthesis proce-
dures if Po is chosen so as to make Z1 simpler, in some respect, to synthesize
than Z would be. By theorem 6.21, the degree of Z1 is equal to the degree
of Z, except ifs has a pole at p = -ft , hence ifs* has a pole at Po. In that
case, the degree falls by one unit, and the process of Fig. I yields the required
!• iterative synthesis. One may rewrite the para-conjugate of (3) as
2Ro
S*=l - - - - (6)
z*+Zo
and the condition of degree reduction is that Z* + Z 0 vanishes at Po, hence
that Po is a root of the equation
(7)
Equation (7) then also has a root at -Pri. At most one half of the roots of
(7) are acceptable, however, for one must have Re Po > 0.
4. The procedure is inapplicable when (7) has only purely imaginary roots.
But, at an imaginary root jwo, Eq. (7) expresses Ro= 0, and Z is then
minimum-resistance. The process of Fig. 5.9 then applies with Ro= 0 and
also gives a realization of Z by a lossless two-port terminated on Z 1 with
deg Z1 = deg Z - I. Finally, if (7) has no roots whatsoever, Z is the sum
of a constant resistance and of a lossless impedance, by 5.36.
5. Although the process of Fig. I is inapplicable for IXO = 0, Ro = 0, one

may show that it reduces to Fig. 5.9 when IXO and Ro tend simultaneously
to zero, by positive values. Since s2, s, and s1 in (5) tend to 1, so that Ro
and I - s1 tend simultaneously to O in (4), Z1 can be evaluated by l'Hospi-
tal's rule. Since, for IXO small and Ro= 0, one has Z(IXo + jwo) = jXo + 1Xo/ho
by (5.36), with ho real positive, one is led to replace Ro by 1Xo/ho, hence
Ro/1Xo by I/ho. With this substitution, and with Ro= 0 wherever it occurs
alone, (4) reduces to (5.37) and Fig. I to Fig. 5.9. As already mentioned in
5.26, however, jwo cannot be a pole of Z(p) in that case, otherwise Xo is
infinite, but a reduction of degree by one unit is then achieved by the series
extraction of a lossless impedance consisting in the principal part of Z(p)
at its pole.
6. As a consequence of 3 and 4, any passive one-port is realizable as a lossless

2-port closed on a positive resistance. The number of elements in the general
case (Fig. I) is four per step (one inductance and three lossless constant
One-port synthesis by all-pass extraction 259
elements), thus per unit of degree. The number of elements thus agrees with
the values of 5.5, and the synthesis is canonic.
As in 5.30, one may add the imaginary resistance -jXo in series with
port 2 of the 2-port of Fig. 1, in order to reduce it to a straight connection
at infinite frequency, and one may subtract the same resistance from Z1(P),
which does not alter its degree. The extracted 2-port has become Fig. 2 and
Ro .___ _ _"°
Fm. 9.2
is an all-pass of scattering matrix (7.84), where s is (6.37), normalized to z; at

the input and to Zo at the output. This results directly from the general definition
of the scattering matrix of 6.37: the operation of Fig. 2 between Ro - jX0
and Ro +jX0 is identical to the operation of its central part (enclosed in
dotted lines) between Ro at both ports; this central part is the dual of the
all-pass of Fig. 7.26. After this modification, the synthesis appears as a
succession of complex all-pass extractions. Note, however, that the successive
all-pass 2-ports are generally mismatched at their junctions.
7. The impedance matrix of the 2-port of Fig. 2 is obtained by inspection,

or it can be deduced from its scattering matrix (7.84), wheres is (6.37), by
(6.60) where Z 1 is the impedance matrix
Ze = [~ci 1ol (8)
of the complex terminations and Re its real part. This gives
Z= Ro [p-jwo +J1X.o~o/Ro P +IX.o -jwo ] (9)

IX.O P-1X.o -Jwo p -jwo -j1X.0Xo/Ro
and the corresponding chain matrix is

K= I [p -jWo +j<XoXo/Ro <Xo(Ro + X~/Ro) ] (10)
p - <XO - jwo <Xo/Ro P - jwo - j<Xo Xo/ Ro
The matrices reduce to (5.45) and (5.46), respectively, for the limiting case
discussed in 5.
8. From (4.35), with a lossless impedance matrix (4.30), one deduces

Z12 Z21(Zb + zb*)
Za+ Za* = - --------
(Z22 + Zb)(Z22 - Zb*)
(11)
At a zero of zb + zb* , the factors Z22 + zb and Z22 - zb* in the denomin-
ator take identical values. Since Z22 + Zb cannot vanish in Re p > 0, and
since 2 12 and 2 22 are finite in Rep > 0, a zero of Zb + Zb* in Rep > 0 is
necessarily a zero of Za + Za*; this also holds for zeros in Rep < 0 by para-
conjugate symmetry. Conversely, a zero of Za + Za* in Rep cfa 0, which is
not a zero of Z12 Z21, is necessarily a zero of Zb + Zb*. In (9), the only
zeros of Z12 Z21 are Po and -Pt, Consequently, after the extraction of
Fig. 2, the zeros in Rep cfa O of the expression similar to (7) for the residual
impedance are the zeros of (7), except Po and -Pt whose multiplicity is
decreased by one unit.
An impedance Z is lossless at jwo either if Z + Z* has a zero at jw 0
or if Z has a pole at jw 0 • When terminated on an impedance lossless at
jw 0 , the 2-port of Fig. 2, which is lossless at all frequencies, yields an impe-
dance lossless atjwo. This proves that the zeros of (7) on thej-axis and the
poles of Z, taken together, are invariant in the synthesis process based on
Fig. 2 with <XO =I- 0, but are possibly exchanged.
If the impedance Z of degree m to be realized is decomposed into
Z = Zai + Z/3 where Zoi is minimum-reactance and Z/3 lossless, one has
+
m = deg Zoi deg Z/3 since Zoi and Z/3 have no poles in common. Moreover,
one has Z + +
Z* = Zai Zai*; since Zoi and Zoi* have no poles in common, the
number of zeros of (7) is 2 deg Zoi. Although deg Z decreases by one unit in
the synthesis process, deg Zoi does not necessarily decrease, for zeros on the
j-axis of Zoi + Zai* may be exchanged with poles of Z/3.
The above discussion is resumed from the point of view of global
synthesis in 36-39.
Real one-ports
9. We now assume that Z(p) is a positive real function. Since p0 was arbi-
trary in 2, one may take it to be real, thus Po= <XO> 0, so that Z 0 is also
real. With these simplifications (5) reduces to
Z-Ro P +<Xo
s1=---.--
Z +
Zo P-<Xo
Real one-ports 261
and (4) to
pZ -rxoRo
Z1=Ro----- ( 12)
pRo - rxoZ
This is Richard's theorem 2 : for every rxo > 0 and Ro= Z(rxo) # 0, (12) is a
positive real function with Z, of identical degree: a reduction of degree by one unit
occurs if rxo is a real root of (7). The extracted section of Fig. 2 where the imag-
inary resistances disappear is called the Richard section. It is simply the dual
of the all-pass of Fig. 7.28. For rxo = 0 (one then has Ro= 0), the inductance
in the Richard section takes the value R 0 /rxo = 1/ho and the gyrator dis-
appears, thus the section reduces to a shunt inductance.
10. Returning to the case where Po is complex in (4-5) but Z(p) still a real
function so that Z(fri) = z;:, we compute the residual impedance at the
conjugate point Pri, where ( 5) reduces to
Pt(Zt - Z0 ) (rxo - }Wo)Xo

Zt(Pri -Po) (Ro -JXo)Wo
and (4) to
zl (Po)* = R 0 w 0 +rx 0 X 0 .
Ro----- - J - - - - -
2X0 R 0 w 0
( 13)
Ro wo -rxoXo Rowo -rxoXo
Since it is known that Z 1 is a positive function, the real part of ( 13) is posi-
tive for rxo > 0, unless it vanishes identically; one thus has, after division by
rxo wo'
( Ro+ Xo)/(Ro _ Xo) > 0 (14)

rxo wo rxo wo
Since the sum 2Ro/rxo of the two factors of ( 14) is positive, the product can
only be positive if both factors are positive, hence Ro/rxo > IXo/wol- This
gives IXo/Rol ~ !wo/rxol, that is the angle inequality
larg Zol < larg Pol

provided the principal values of the arguments (between -7T/2 and 7T/2)
in Re Po> 0 are taken.3
Note that the equality can only hold in (15) in Rep> 0 if it holds
identically, that is, if arg Z ± arg p = 0, thus arg f(p) = 0 withf(p) = Z/p
or Zp. Since, in both cases, the function log J(p) is analytic in Rep> 0,
except possibly for singularities on the imaginary axis, the relations between
its real part log If I and its imaginary part arg J are the ones established in
6.23 for attenuation and phase, and a zero phase corresponds to a constant
attenuation. Consequently,Jhas constant modulus and zero phase, and one
has Z = pk or Z = k/p: in Re p > 0 the angle inequality becomes an equality
only for an inductance or a capacitance.
On the imaginary axis, one has iarg Pol = rr/2, and the equality is
reached in (15) at every point where Ro= 0. If the ratio Ro/rxo is evaluated
by !'Hospital's rule as in 5, that is, if it is replaced by I /ho, one then obtains
(5.41). If (5.36) is applied to a reactance, I/ho is dX/dw at wo, and the
inequality becomes (5. 70). Since all these substitutions can be made in the
real part of (13) for rxo positive but small (in particular, Ro/rxo is replaced
by dR/drx which is equal to dX/dw by the Cauchy-Riemann relation), it
remains true that the equality cannot be reached locally unless it holds
identically. In particular, the equality dX/dw = ±X/w for all w gives
again X = Lw or X = - I /Cw, that is, an inductance or a capacitance.
Similar results are obtained if one considers the limiting equality in (5.41).
For wo = hoXo, one has X1 = OCJ in (5.40), and the input impedance in
Fig. 5.12 reduces to Ro +P/ho. For wo = -ho Xo, one has h1 = oo in (5.40),
and this shorts the last shunt branch in Fig. 5.12; one then easily checks that
the input impedance reduces to R 0 + w~/ h0 p. In either case one has an
inductance or a capacitance after the extraction of Ro, and the Brune process
need not be applied.
11. When the 2-port of Fig. 1 is replaced by the one-port of Fig. 2, the
constantjXo must be added to residual impedance (13) which becomes
Z1(Pt) = Z 1 (P6) + jX0 = n(R0 - jX0 ) (16)
with
woRo +rxoXo
n=------ ( 17)
woRo -rxoXo
and the simplifications are similar to the ones of (5.42-44). When the extrac-
tion process is applied to Z1 at P6, the chain matrix of the extracted 2-port is
obtained by replacing wo, Xo, and Ro in ( 10) by -wo, -nXo, and nRo,
respectively. The product of the two chain matrices turns out to be real.
After a few simplifications resulting from ( 17), this product becomes
(p - rxo)2 + w~
[ p + (rx~ + w~)/n + l)R0 [w~(n - 1)2/rx~(n + 1) + l]]
2 prx0 (n 2 (lB)
rx 0 p(n + 1) /R 0 n p2 + (rx~ + w~)n
so that the impedance matrix of the cascade combination, written decom-
posed into partial fractions, is
2nR0
n +1
[
-1
0 11 + (nnR+ 1p)rx
0
0
0
[l 1
~] (19)
The first term represents a gyrator, the second term an inductance 2-port
reduced to a single shunt arm, and the third term a perfectly coupled
Real one-ports 263
1 n
Fm. 9.3
capacitance 2-port. The resulting 2-port (Youla section) is shown in Fig. 3

with the element values
(20)
(n + I ),x 0 2,x 0 w 0
(21)
C = (,x~ + w~)R0 = (,x~ + w~)(WoRo -,xoXo)
R=--=-----
+
2nR0 w 0 R 0 ,x 0 X 0
(22)
n+ 1 w0
and n given by (17). All elements (including n) are positive owing to the
angle inequality.
In the limiting case discussed in 5, the 2-port of Fig. 3 reduces to the
Brune section of Fig. 5.14, and the matrices (18-19) to the corresponding
matrices (5.47-48).
12. One obtains an iterative synthesis procedure for a real one-port by

extracting a Richard section at every positive real root of (7), a Youla
section at every pair of conjugate roots with positive real parts of (7), and
their degenerate cases (shunt inductance or Brune section) at a zero root
or at a pair of imaginary roots, respectively. The residual impedance is a
real function in each case, since the extracted 2-ports are real, and its
degree decreases by one or two units, respectively. The final residual impe-
dance is a reactance (Foster function) in series with a resistance. This
proves that any real passive impedance is realizable as a real lossless 2-port closed
on one resistance. The number of elements in this synthesis is one reactive

element and one constant lossless element per unit of degree (these are the
numbers of elements in a Richard section, and the numbers are double, for
a double degree reduction, in a Youla section). The resulting numbers
coincide with the value of 5.5, and the synthesis is canonic.
Darlington's synthesis 4
13. Since a one-port is necessarily reciprocal, a realization using gyrators
(and these occur in Richard and Youla sections) seems unnatural. Note that
the gyrator spontaneously disappears in the above synthesis procedure when
all roots of (7) are purely imaginary or zero, for each extracted section then
reduces to a Brune section or to a shunt inductance. In the Brune synthesis,
a pair of conjugate imaginary roots was generated at each step by a pre-
liminary resistance extraction. This is not possible, however, if one wishes to
keep a realization containing a single resistance. The only remaining possi-
bility is to abandon the requirement of degree reduction at each step. Once
a nonreciprocal section has been extracted at some root of (7), one is free to
operate a second extraction without degree reduction and to try to cancel
the gyrators appearing in the degree-reducing extractions by gyrators of
opposite polarity provoked in supplementary extractions which are not
degree-reducing.
Let us first remark that the polarity of the gyrator appearing in Fig.
7.18, on which the whole synthesis process is based, is in fact arbitary: a
polarity reversal of this gyrator corresponds to a change of circulation in
Fig. 7.17, thus to a permutation of z1 and z2 in (7.81), which remains in-
variant. On the other hand, the all-pass of scattering matrix (7.84) virtually
extracted in the synthesis process is then changed into the transpose all-pass
(s and 1 are interchanged). This permutes the entries Z 12 and Z 21 of the
impedance matrix (9). It is easily checked that this permutation is equivalent
to the simultaneous replacement of oco and Ro by - oco and - Ro, respecti-
vely; it is also clear that changing the sign of Ro changes the gyrator polarity
in Fig. 2, while the simultaneous change of sign of oco leaves unaltered the
elements involving the ratio Ro/oc 0 •
By (4.23), the determinant of (10) is the reciprocal of (6.37). Note that
it depends only on the point Po at which the extraction is made, but not on
the impedance parameters Ro and Xo. The determinant of the transposed
section is (6.37). Consequently, if two successive extractions with opposite
gyrator polarities are made, the combined section has det K = I and is
reciprocal. In particular, two Richard sections can be combined into one
real reciprocal section (to be called a modified Brune section for a reason to be
explained). Similarly, two Youla sections can be combined into one real
reciprocal section to be called Darlington section. This proves that any real pas-
sive impedance is realizable as a real lossless reciprocal 2-port closed on one resistance.
14. The chain matrix of a Richard section results from ( 10) with wo = Xo = 0
and is
K--1-[
- p-
p
oc 0 oco/Ro
(23)
At oco the residual impedance (12) becomes indeterminate of the form 0/0.
By !'Hospital's rule, its value is
(24)
where
1 +ocoLo/Ro
m= (25)
1 - ocoLo/Ro
Lo denoting the value of dZ/dp at oco. The chain matrix of the second section
is (23) with Ro replaced by mRo and with changes of sign in oco and R 0 to
account for the gyrator reversal. The product of (23) by the second matrix
thus obtained is
1 [ +
p2 oc5/m PocoRo(l + m)] (26)
p2 - oc5 poc0 (1 + m) / mR0 p2 +oc5m
Ifonereplaceswo, Xo, and ho in (5.42) by joco ,}Ro, and -oco(l + m)/R 0 (1-m),
respectively, one obtains
n= -m (27)
Moreover, the same substitutions and (27) transform (5.47) into (26). The
modified Brune section is thus realizable by Fig. 5.14 with n = -m and
Rom l+m
L----· C=-- (28)
- (1 + m)oco' Rooco
It only differs from the original Brune section by the fact that the ratio n is
negative.
15. The realization of the Darlington section and the computation of its
element values involves much heavier algebra. We therefore introduce the
following abbreviations in ( 18)
,82 =w5 + oc5 (29)

h = oc (n + I) /R0 n
0 (30)
k = oc 0 (n + I)R0 [w~(n -1)2/(n + l)2oc5 + l] (31)
so that the chain matrix (18) of the first Youla section becomes
1 [p2 + 132/n (32)
(p - °'0)2 + w5 hp
Since it is known that the determinant of (32) is the inverse of (7.88) because
(18) is the product of (10), whose determinant is the inverse of (6.37), by a
matrix of conjugate determinant, one must have
(p2 +f32jn)(p2 +f32n) -khp2 = [(P-0t:0)2 +w5][(p +0t:0)2 + w5] (33)
in (32), and this requires
kh = 0t:~(n + 1) 2/n + w~(n - 1) 2/n (34)
a relation also resulting from (30-31 ). The residual impedance Z1(P) after
the first extraction is computed by
B-ZD
Z1---- (35)
-ZC-A
a formula obtained by solving (4.25) (with different notations) in terms of
the load impedance. At Po, (35) becomes indeterminate of the form 0/0,
but l'Hospital's rule gives
Z1 = Z1(Po) = k -2Po Zo - (p~ + 132n)Lo (36)
hZ0 + hp0 L 0 - 2p 0
where Lo is the (generally complex) value of dZ/dp at Po. We denote (36) by
R1 + jX1, but do not give the explicit formulas for R1 and X1, because they
are so heavy that it is preferable to work numerically at this stage in every
practical application, and because they are not needed in the following
theoretical discussion.
16. We further define n1, h1, and k1 by formulas similar to (17), (30), and
(31), except that Ro and Xo are replaced by R1 and X1. The chain matrix of
the second Youla section is then (32) with n, k, h replaced by n1, k1, h1, and
0t:o replaced by -0t:o in the denominator to account for the gyrator reversal.
The product of the chain matrices is the chain matrix of the Darlington
section
with
l
p4 + 2(w~ - 0t:~)p2 + /34
[a
C !] (37)
a= p4 + p2(kh1 + (32/n + f3 2/n1) + f34/nn 1

b = p 3 (k + k1) + pf3 2(kn1 + k1/n)
(38)
c = p 3 (h + h1) + pf3 2(h1n + h/n1)
d = p4 + p2(hk1 + (32n + f32n1) + f34nn1
The determinant of (37) is unity, for it is the product of (7.88) by its inverse,
owing to the change of sign of cxo in the second Youla section.
17. The entries of the impedance matrix deduced from (37) are
z.. =p4 + aiip2 + bii (39)

i1 up(p2/wi + 1)
with
a11 =khi +/32 (1/ni +l(n)
ai 2 = 2(w~-cx~)
a 22 = kih + {3 2 (n + ni)
bu =/34/nni
bi2 = /34 (40)
h22 = f34nni
u= f3 2 (hin + h/ni)
V = h +hi
Wi = u/v
Since, h, k, n, hi, ki, ni are known to be positive, so are all expressions (40),
except possibly ai2. The partial fraction expansion of (39) is
(41)
By (4.22), and the reciprocity relation AD - BC= l, one has successively
det Z = Z11 Z22 - Zr2 = (AD - l)/C2 = B/C= b/c (42)

From the values (38) of band c and the value of Wi
in (40), it appears that
(42) has no poles at p = 0 and p = oo and only simple poles at p = ±Jwi, so
that the residue determinants at all poles of (41) must vanish. This is obvious
from the coefficient values for the residues at 0 and oo. The verification for
the residues at p = ±jwi is more tedious and will be omitted. From the above
considerations and the form of (41), it results that the partial fraction ex-
pansion of the impedance matrix is necessarily of the for_m
1]1 + Gp1[m1 (43)
and the Darlington section is thus realized as Fig. 4. By comparison of (43),

FIG. 9.4
(41), and (40), the following element values are trivial:

L = I/v; C = um/{3 4 ; (44)
It remains to compute C1 and m1. The identification of (43) and (41) gives
u/C1 = a11 wr - w1 - b11 (45)
m1u/C1 = a12 wr - Wj - b12 (46)
Set
x = h1n + h/n1 (47)
thus one of the equations (40) becomes u = f3 2x. Replacing au, b11 , and wr
in (45-46) by their values (40), one obtains
xv 2 /C1 = kh1xv +f3 2[(I/n1 + I)xv -x 2 -v 2 /nn1] (48)
(49)
In (48), write kh1 = (kh)(h/h1) and replace kh by (34). Then replace x by
(4 7), v by its value (40), and {3 2 by (29). This gives
xv 2h/C1h1 = oc~[h 1 (n + 1) + h(n 1 + I) /n 1] 2 + w~[h 1 (n - I) + (I - n1)h/n 1] 2
(50)
On the other hand, (49) considered as a quadratic form in x and v is trans-
formed into a sum of squares
(51)
One-port synthesis without transformers 269
Expression (50) shows that C1 is positive, and (51) then shows that the ratio
m1 is negative. The remaining elements (44) are clearly positive.
18. The modified Brune section contains two reactive and one constant
element and affords a degree reduction of one unit. The numbers of elements
in the Darlington section are double for a degree reduction of two units. By
comparison with the previous synthesis methods, Darlington's synthesis thus
wastes one reactive element per unit of degree at every root in Re p > 0 of
(7) which is not purely imaginary.
One-port synthesis without transformers

19. Consider the factorization (7.80) where s2 is (6.37), and also the cor-
responding realization of the impedance in terms of z1, z 2 and their duals
embodied in Fig. 7.16 which has been redrawn as a balanced bridge in
Fig. 7.24. The impedances z1 and z2 are only real if Po is real in (6.37).
Assume, thus, Po= cxo > 0. The normalized impedance z2 is then p/cxo and
corresponds to a denormalized inductance Ro/cxo. This shows that any real
passive impedance Z(p) is realizable by Fig. 5, where cx 0 > 0 is arbitrary, with
Fm. 9.5
Ro= Z(cxo) and where the real impedance Z1(P) is given by Richard's theorem (12).
Because of the bridge balance, the dotted connection in Fig. 5 can be replaced
by an arbitrary impedance. The realization of Fig. 5 only leads to an iterative
synthesis procedure if Z 1 is simpler to realize than Z, and the various possi-
bilities of simplification will be discussed later. Although the realization of
Z is then reduced to the realization of two impedances ( Z1 and its dual
Ri/Z1 ), so that the number of elements grows exponentially, this synthesis is
of interest since it avoids ideal transformers.
20. The degree of Z1 is only smaller than the degree of Z if a 0 is a real

positive root of (7). If (7) has no real roots, simplifications allowing one to
continue the iteration must be found by other methods, the idea being to
apply once the process without degree reduction, but to choose its arbitrary
parameter ao in such a way that a degree reduction becomes possible at the
next step (on Z 1 and R5/ Z 1). One method (Bott-Duffin) is analogous to
Brune's process in the sense that it involves a preliminary resistance extraction,
whereas the other method (Fialkow-Gerst) does not require a preliminary
resistance extraction and therefore leaves the roots of (7) invariant. The
Fialkow-Gerst method5 starts from the remark that the process of Fig. 5 can be
extended to the case of a pair of complex roots a 0 ±jw0 of (7), with a 0 > 0,
provided Z(o:o ±jwo) is real, its value being then denoted by Ro. Since the
reflection coefficient s of Z with respect to Ro then vanishes at Po = o:o + jwo
and at the conjugate point, the function (6.37) and its conjugate can be
extracted simultaneously. The product function is (7.88) and the corre-
sponding normalized impedance is (7.90), so the realization of Fig. 6 results.
1 1'
2ao
Fm. 9.6
In general, however, Z is not real at the complex roots of (7), and a prelim-
inary reduction according to Fig. 5, without degree reduction, is necessary to
ensure the stated condition for Z 1 (and automatically for R5/ Z1 ).
21. Keeping the notation Po= o:o ±jwo for the pair of roots of (7), we now
designate by 0:1 the parameter of the preliminary process. Requiring Z1(Po),
hence s1(Po), to be real is equivalent to
Im Po+ 0:1. Z(Po) - Z(o:1) =0 (52)

Po - 0:1 Z(Po) + Z(o:1)
With
Z(po) =Ro+ jXo; Z(oc1) = R1 (53)
this condition becomes
(54)
Equation (54) certainly has a positive root oc 1 since the first member of (52)
varies from
Im _Z_(P_o)_-_Z_(0_) = __2_X_0_Z_(0_)_ _
Z(p 0 ) +Z(0) [R 0 + Z(0)] 2 + X~
for oc1 = 0 to
0 )_-_Z_(_oo_) = __-_2_X_0_Z_(~oo_)~
- Im _Z_(P_
Z(p0 )-Z(oo) [R 0 +Z(oo)] 2 +X~
for oc1 = oo: these extreme values are of opposite signs since Z(0) and Z( oo)
are real positive. The Fialkow-Gerst method fails at purely imaginary roots
of (7), that is, when oco = 0; if, however, one has Z(jwo) + Z( -jw 0 ) = 0,
Z(jwo) is purely reactive and Z is minimum-resistance; consequently, the
Bott-Duffin process to be described next can be applied without preliminary
resistance extraction and the advantage of the invariance of the roots of (7)
is preserved.
22. The Bott-Duffin method 6 starts from a minimum-resistance and minimum-

reactance impedance whose real part vanishes at some pair of conjugate
points ±jwo (wo =fa 0, wo =fa oo, otherwise a degree reduction is possible by
simple reactance extraction). At ±jwo, Z takes some imaginary value
±jX0 (Xo =fa 0, X 0 =fa oo for the same reason), so that its reflection coefficient
s with respect to an arbitrary Ro has unit modulus. If one then chooses the
parameter of the extracted factor s2 = (p -oco)/(p +oco) so that the phase
of s at ±jwo is entirely taken by s2, one will have s1 = 1 at ±jwo, which
means Z1 = oo; thus an antiresonant circuit can be extracted from Z 1 en-
suring a degree reduction by two units. The condition s1 = 1 at ±jwo is
equivalent to s = s2, thus to Z = Z2 where Z2 is Rop/oco. The condition is
thus Xo = Rowo/oco or, since Ro= Z(oco),
Z(oco) = ocoXo/wo (55)
If Xo/wo is pos1t1ve, (55) has at least one positive real root oco, because
oco X 0 /wo increases from 0 to oo with oco, whereas Z(oco) is finite positive
everywhere for oco > 0 and does not vanish for oco = 0 by hypothesis. For
Xo/wo < 0, the process is changed into its dual by requiring s1 = -1 instead
of s1 = 1 at ±jwo, which means Z1 = 0 and allows a degree reduction by
two units by means of a parallel extraction of a resonant circuit. The con-

dition s1 = -1 is equivalent to s = -s2 , thus to Z = R~/ Z 2 • At ±jwo, the
condition becomes Xo = -Rorxo/wo, thus
Z(rxo) = -Xo wo/rxo (56)
The second member of (56) is positive for rxo > 0, Xo/wo < 0 and decreases
from oo to O when rxo increases from O to oo. The existence of a solution of
(56) is thus ensured as in the first case.
23. We now compute explicitly the element values of the antiresonant circuit
which can be extracted from Z1 in the case Xo/wo > 0. By (12), the residue
of Z1 at p = jwo is, by !'Hospital's rule.
(pZ-rxoRo)(p-jwo)] -woXo -rxoRo
[
p-rxoZ/Ro p~jw• 1 -rxoLo/Ro
where L 0 is dZ/dp at jwo, that is, 1/ho of (5.36). By (55), the residue h1
becomes
h1 X 0 (w6 rx.6) + (57)
2 Wo(WoLo/Xo -1)
and is positive by (5.41 ). The reactance extractable from Z 1 is h 1 p/(p 2 + wg),
z
in accordance with (5. 7). If the residual impedance is called 1 , the resulting
circuit is Fig. 7, where the arbitrary impedance in the second diagonal has
been replaced by an inductance L1 in order to prepare a simplification, due
to Pantell, by means of a Y- ~ transformation on the elements separated
by the dotted line. If L1 is so chosen that it is resonant at wo with the capaci-
tance 1/Ro rxo, that is, if
L1 = R0 rx0 /w~ (58)
the determinant (4.6) takes the constant value
~=(h1 +R0 rx 0 )R0 rx0 /wg=(rxgx0 +h1 w0 )rx5X0 /w3 (59)
When the elements of the ~-circuit are computed by (4.9), it appears that
z: is a resonant circuit at w 0 , which can thus be combined in parallel with
the resonant circuit already present in Fig. 7. The resulting Pantell circuit 7 is
Fig. 8. By (55), (57), and (59), the element values become
L 3 -- L..l.
,\/R - 2 + (WoLo/Xo + l)rx.5/wg (X / )
0 rxo - 0 Wo
WoLo/Xo -1
L2 = (~ + R5)/h1 = (1 + WoL 0 /X0 )X0 rxg/2wg (60)
and all are positive. The case Xo/wo < 0 is treated in a dual fashion.
I L1 1/h1 I
L__ __ _J
Fm. 9.7
Fm. 9.8
24. Let Xm denote the number of reactive elements required to realize an

impedance of degree m. The Pantell improvement of the Bott-Duffin process
uses the five reactive elements of Fig. 8 and reduces the synthesis of an im-
pedance of degree m to the synthesis of two impedances of degree m - 2.
Consequently, one has
Xm = 5 +2Xm-2 (61)
The Fialkow-Gerst procedure uses two reactances in the preliminary process
(Fig. 5) without degree reduction; the two impedances of Fig. 5 are then
reduced to four impedances of degree m - 2 by using Fig. 6 twice, with a
total of 2 (4) = 8 reactances. Consequently, one has
Xm = IO +4Xm-2 (62)
and the Fialkow-Gerst process is twice as costly as the Bott-Duffin process.
In any case, either process proves that a real passive impedance is realizable
without ideal transformers.
Note that the basic bridge circuits of Figs. 5 and 6 permit one to realize
simultaneously an impedance Zand its dual R~/Z (seen from the opposite
diagonal) by means of the two dual impedances Z 1 and R~/ Z 1 • Since two
dual impedances are both required and produced at every step, it is possible
to organize the Bott-Duffin and Fialkow-Gerst processes into a cascade
realization for pairs of one-ports, that is, for 2-ports. In such a cascade of
2-ports, successive interconnections occur at more than one port, so that true
2-port behavior is generally not ensured without the insertion of isolating
transformers, and the process then loses its interest.
Uncontrollable and secular states in one-port synthesis

25. Any realization of an irreducible impedance of degree m employing the minimum
number m of reactive elements is completely controllable and completely observable. This
is proved by noting that the number of roots of the characteristic equation
of the network formed by terminating the impedance on a positive resistance
(as discussed in 5.4) is m, so the network has m free states. Since a network
containing m reactive elements cannot have more free states, there are no
,
I
uncontrollable or inobservable states left. In particular, the Brune process of
5.26 and the canonic synthesis of 12 produce completely controllable and completely
observable realizations. On the other hand, this is generally not true for the
processes of 13---24 which involve an excessive number of reactive elements.
i
Since excessive elements are generated by the application of the factorization
theorem 6.21 in conditions which do not produce a reduction of degree, it is
natural to investigate whether uncontrollable or inobservable states appear
in this application.
Uncontrollable and secular states in one-port synthesis 275
26, If z is an irreducible impedance, its reflectance s is an irreducible fraction

of the same degree. Withs= n/d, the one-port equationy = sx becomes, in
polynomial form
<!J = nx (63)
Consider the circuit of Fig. 7.17 and denote by Xi the incoming signals on the
circulator and by Yi the outgoing signals from the circulator. The equations
of the circulator are (7.48) except for the notations, thus
Y1 =xo; yo=X2 (64)
In equations of the type (63) with s1 = n1/d1 and s2 = n2/d2 expressing that
the circulator is terminated on z1 and z2, the incoming and outgoing signals
are permuted, and the terminal conditions are thus
(65)
The elimination of x1 andy1 between (64) and the first equation (65) gives
(66)
whereas the elimination of x2 between (64) and the second equation (65)
gives
n2y2 = d2yo (67)
Equations (66-67) are combined into
[f]~o (68)
The replacement of the state variables by the linear combinations y2, xo, yo
does not alter the discussion of3.52 concerning the appearance of uncontrol-
lable and inobservable states. The submatrix called F"- in 3.52 is the first
column of (68) and the one-port of Fig. 7.18 has an inobservable state if d1 and n2
have a common factor. Since at a common zero of d1 and n2 the entries n1 and
d2 of (68) do not vanish (for s1 and s2 were assumed irreducible), the rank of
the matrix (68) remains 2, and the inobservable state is internally secular. On the
other hand, the local rank of the matrix in (68) falls from 2 to 1 when one
has simultaneously
(69)
and this is possible only if n1 and d2 have a common factor. Consequently,
the one-port of Fig. 7.8 has an uncontrollable state if n1 and d2 have a common factor.
27. We now apply the above results to the factorization of 2 where (6.37)
shows that
(70)
On the other hand, a simplification by p - Po always occurs in (5), but the

+
simplification by p Pt only occurs in the case of degree reduction. Conse-
quently, the numerator n1 of s1 contains p + Pt if there is no degree reduction,
and n1 and d2 have a common factor. This proves that the extraction of the
complex all-pass of Fig. 2 generates an uncontrollable state at -Pt when the extraction
does not decrease the degree of the impedace.
If the gyrator polarity is reversed in Fig. 2, so is the circulation direction
in Fig. 7.17, and the roles of z1 and z2, hence of s1 and s2 are permuted. One
then has n1 = p -Po, d1 = p + P6, and n2 contains p + Pri when there is no
degree reduction. Consequently, p + Pri is common to d1 and n2. This proves
that the extraction of the complex all-pass of Fig. 2 with reversed gyrator generates an
internally secular state at -Pt when the extraction does not decrease the degree of the
impedance.
28, If the circulator of Fig. 7.3 appearing in Fig. 2 is replaced by the dual
circulator of Fig. 7.4, the all-pass, in the case where p = oco is real, reduces
to the gyrator and inductance included in Fig. 3.5. The results of 3.53-54
thus appear as particular cases of the above theorems.
In the Darlington synthesis of 13-18, all extractions are grouped into
pairs with opposite gyrator polarities, so that uncontrollable states and in-
ternally polynomial states are confluent, as required for a reciprocal one-port
by 3.51. The same results hold for the Bott-Duffin and Fialkow-Gerst syn-
theses, and the example of Fig. 3. 7 appears as a particular case of the bridge
of Fig. 5. In any case, all uncontrollable or internally secular states are
restricted to Rep > 0, as required by 3.51, for all-pass extractions which are
not degree-reducing are forbidden elsewhere, and extractions at imaginary
roots of (7) or poles of Z spontaneously produce reciprocal sections.
The scattering matrix of a lossless 2-port8

29, Denote by SiJ = SiJ/s the entries of the scattering matrix S of a lossless
2-port between constant terminations with strictly positive real parts, s being
the least common denominator of the Sij; s is a Hurwitz polynomial since S
is bounded. Since Sis para-unitary, the conditions (6. 73), written with lower
asterisks, become
;j (71)
-I
I
·1 s12s12* +s22s22* = ss* (72)
:1
s12s11* +s22s21* = 0 (73)
By analogy with (6.75), one deduces s21s21*=s12s12*' and this expresses
that the function y = s12/s21* satisfies yy* = 1 and is thus para-unitary.
i
II
The scattering matrix of a lossless 2-port 277
By analogy with (6.15), the irreducible form ofy is thus kt*/t where tis some
polynomial (not yet proved Hurwitz, for y was not proved bounded) and
where k is a constant of unit modulus. Since the assumed form ofy is irredu-
cible, t divides s21* and not s12; similarly t* divides s12 and not s21*, hence t
divides s12*. As a result of the first remark, t divides s11* in (73); as a result
of the second remark, t divides s 22 * in the para-conjugate of (73). We have
thus proved that t divides all Sij* and, consequently, that t* divides all Sij.
In addition, (71) shows that tt* divides ss*. Since sis the least common de-
monimator, this is only compatible with the previous results if t divides s,
and t* divides s*. Since s is Hurwitz, so is t. As a conclusion, all entries S;j
contain the all-pass factor t*/t.
30. The matrix S is not altered if the numerators Sij and the common de-
nominators are all multiplied by tk-1/2. This replacesy = kt*/t by (kk*) 112 =
lkl = I and thus produces s12 = s21* in the new form of S, and consequently,
s22 = -s11*, by (73). Denoting by g the new common denominator (arising
from st), which is no longer the least common denominator, but is still
Hurwitz, and by h andf the new numerators of Sn and S12, the matrix takes
the form
S--1 [ h (74)
- g f*
In this notation, (73) is automatically satisfied, whereas (71) and (72) reduce
to
(75)
Since Sis hurwitzian, the degree of g is not smaller than the degrees off
and h. In (74), one can still multiply all polynomials by a common real
constant without altering its form, and this constant can be chosen to make
the leading coefficient of g of unit modulus. With this convention, the result-
ing form (74) is unique, (except for an arbitrary sign in all polynomials) by
the very process by which it was obtained. Finally, the scattering matrix of a
lossless 2-port has a unique canonic form (74), where g is a Hurwitz polynomial with
a leading coefficient of unit modulus, of degree not smaller than the degree off and h,
and where], g, hare related by (75).
Common excess factors may occur in all polynomials of the canonic
form (74). In the notations of 29, all numerators Sij had a common factor t*;
after the introduction of the additional common factor t, a factor tt* is pro-
duced in all numerator polynomials h, J, h*, and f*, whereas g contains t
(but not t*, since g is Hurwitz). In spite of this apparently unnecessary com-
plication, the canonic form is much more convenient than the original form
based on the least common denominator, because (75) gives
(76)
an irreducible expression, since g is Hurwitz. Consequently, the degree of a

lossless 2-port is the degree of the polynomial g ef the canonic form ( 74), owing to a
theorem of 8.20.
31. The following expressions are useful in the computation of the trans-
mission loss and of the return loss. With the notation
ifi=h/f (77)
defining the characteristic function, one has successively
S12S12* =S21S21* =if*/gg* = if* (78)

+
hh* if*
(79)
32. The normalized impedance and admittance matrices are deduced from
(74) by (6.46) and (6.50). This gives the following formulas, where the sub-
scripts e and o denote the para-even and para-odd parts of the polynomials
z = +
_ l _ [ge he (80)
go -ho f*
y- 1
- go +ho
[ge -he
-f*
-f]
ge +he
(81)
33. For a reciprocal lossless 2-port, one hasf =f* in (74) so thatfis para-even.
For a real 2-port operating between real (strictly positive) terminations,
all Sij are real rational fractions, but this is satisfied in (74) if all polynomials
are either real or purely imaginary. The latter case arises after the multi-
plication by k- 1 / 2 involved in the transformation to the form (74), when k is
-1 (a real constant k of unit modulus is ±1). Fork= I, form (74) is valid
with all real polynomials. Fork= -1, all polynomials are imaginary, and it
is preferable to produce real polynomials by introducing a common factor j
inf, g, h; since (jf)* = -jf*, the negative signs in the entries 21 and 22 are
interchanged in the real form thus obtained. The real canonic form ef the
scattering matrix ef a real lossless 2-port is, therefore,
(82)
with either the upper or the lower signs everywhere and g manic. Moreover, for a real
reciprocal lossless 2-port, one has f = ±f* so that f is even or odd. Also (75)
becomes
(83)
I''
I
The scattering matrix of a lossless 2-port 279
in that case. The upper signs have to be adopted in (82-83) for f even, and the lower
signs for f odd. Formulas (77-79) remain valid in all cases, whereas (80-81)
are only valid for f even: for f odd all subscripts e and o have to be interchanged.
34. For a real symmetric 2-port operating between equal terminations (and sym-
metry implies reciprocity), one has Su= S22, hence h = =fh* and h is odd
or even (if f was even or odd, respectively), thus the characteristic function (77)
is odd. Relation (83) then becomes
±(12 -h2) =gg* (84)
Write
(85)
where both grr, and gfJ are Hurwitz polynomials so defined that grr, contains
the zeros with negative real parts of (85), while gfJ* contains the zeros with
positive real parts. The para-conjugate of (85) gives ±(f - h) = grr,*gfJ, and
comparison with (84) shows that g is grr,g{J or -grr,gfJ. In the following com-
putation of the lattice impedances we assume the first alternative g = grr,g{J;
the second alternative leads to dual formulas, hence to inverse lattice
impedances. Expressions (7. 77) become
S1 = (f + h)/g = gfJ*/gfJ (86)
S2 = (f - h) /g = =fgrr,*/grr, (87)
The normalized lattice impedances resulting from (6.10) are then
1 +s1 g{J +g{J* g{Je

Z1=---=--- (88)
l-S1 gfJ-gfJ* gfJo
and
z2 = grr, =f grr,* = {grr,o/grr,e for f even

(89)
grr, ± grr,* grr,e/grr,o for f odd
The same results hold for complex symmetric 2-ports, but the lower signs may be
dropped everywhere. Since deg z1 = deg gfJ and deg z2 = deg grr, by (88-89)
and since g = g rr, g fJ, the degree ef a symmetric lossless 2-port is the sum ef the degrees
of its lattice impedances.
For an antimetric 2-port, as defined in 6.46, the condition Su= -S22
makes h and f both even or both odd. The latter possibility does not occur,
because a factor p common to h and f should appear in g, by (75), and g
would not be Hurwitz. Consequently, h,j, and the characteristic function are even
for an antimetric lossless 2-port.
Partial specifications of the scattering matrix

35. Consider the cascade connection of a 2-port of scattering matrix S with
an all-pass 2-port of transmission coefficients 6 and g2 as indicated in Fig. 9.
1 2
2·
Fm. 9.9
The transmission coefficients (S21 and S12) from I to 2 and from 2 to I are
multiplied by 6 and 6, respectively, whereas the input reflection coefficient
is multiplied by the product 6 6- Consequently, the scattering matrix of the
2-port of Fig. 9 is
[ Sn 6S12 ] (90)
6S21 66S22
With 6 = rx*/rx and 6 = f3*/f3, the canonic form of (90) is
I [ h rx*f3f ] (91)
rxf3g rxf3*f* -rx*f3* h*
and the new polynomials g and h have the common factor 0 = rxf3. Also, f3 is
common to f and g, whereas rx is common to f* and g, so that 0 is common
to.ff* and g 2 • Conversely, if hand g have a common factor 0, 0 is also a factor
of.ff* by (75), so the linear factors of 0 must be distributed betweenfandf*;
if rx is the factor of 0 appearing inf* (so that rx is the g.c.d. of h, g, andf*),
the remaining factors f3 = 0/rx must appear inf (so that f3 is the g.c.d. of
h, g, andf). Finally, s22 = -h*/g contains 0*/0, and the matrix is of the form
(90). Consequently, a lossless 2-port contains an all-pass at its output iff h and g
have a common factor; the all-pass is uniquely determined by the distribution of this
common factor between f and f* . A similar theorem holds if ouput is replaced by
input and h by h*. Finally, a lossless 2-port is all-pass free at both ends iff both
h/g and h*/g are irreducible. Since the above theorems are expressed in terms of
the scattering parameters, the concept of all-pass-free 2-port is relative to a
set of terminations.
A common factor 0 in h and g also appears in the input impedance
ti= (I + Sn)/(1 -Sn)= (g + h)/(g -h) (92)
Partial specifications of the scattering matrix 281
of the 2-port terminated at the other end. Since the computation of this im-
pedance has been done algebraically, and not by polynomial elimination,
the common factor may be true (corresponding to uncontrollable states of
i 1 ) or parasitic (corresponding to internally secular states), or partly true and
partly parasitic. From the discussion of25-27, it is clear that this depends on
the polarities of the gyrators contained in the output all-pass.
36. The transmission zeros in one direction are the zeros of S 1 2, that is, of
the irreducible form off /g, including zeros at infinity with their order in the
case deg g > deg]. The transmission zeros in the opposite direction are the
zeros of the irreducible form off*/g. The total number of transmission zeros
is thus the degree of the irreducible form ofjf*/g 2 which is the product of the
irreducible forms off /g andf*/g. But (75) gives
(93)
and cancellation can only occur in this expression at zeros of g which are
zeros of either h or h* , so the total number of transmission zeros is
(94)
where 01(02) is the g.c.d. of g and h(h*). On the other hand, the zeros of.ff*
are distributed symmetrically with respect to the imaginary axis (and are
double on this axis), whereas the cancelled zeros are all in Rep< 0, since g
is Hurwitz. Consequently, the number of transmission zeros in Re p > 0
(counting the zeros on the imaginary axis for half their orders) is
nr = deg g (95)
In other words, the total number of transmission zeros in Re p :::::: 0 of a lossless
2-port is equal to its degree. On the other hand, the number of transmission
zeros in Reps; 0 varies from zero for an all-pass (for h = h* = 0, ff*/g 2 re-
duces to g*/g) to a number equal to the degree for an all-pass free network
(01 = 02 = 1). In particular, a lossless 2-port having transmission zeros only on the
imaginary axis (including infinity) is all-pass free.
37. We know from 6 and 12 that any (real) passive impedance is realizable
as a (real) lossless 2-port closed on one (real) resistance, but we now discuss
the global synthesis of the lossless 2-port. Specifying the passive impedance is
equivalent to specifying its reflection coefficient with respect to an arbitrary
real resistance, and this specifies the entry S11 of the scattering matrix of the
lossless 2-port to be synthesized. From S11 = h/g, h and g are defined except
for an arbitrary common Hurwitz factor. If the irreducible solution is
adopted, the degree of the resulting 2-port is minimal and equal to the de-
gree of Sn and of the prescribed input impedance, hence to (95). The poly-
nomialf is then deduced from (75) but is not unique, since it is obtained by
factoring gg* - hh* (which is para-even) and attributing arbitrarily tofhalf

the zeros of this expression and to f* the other half. Note, however, that the
imaginary zeros of.ff* are necessarily double and must be equally distributed
betweenf andf*. Moreover, the phase of the leading coefficient off is arbi-
trary, and this clearly corresponds to the possibility of inserting an arbitrary
constant all-pass at the output without altering the degree of the 2-port and
its input impedance. In addition, the terminal complex resistance can be
given an arbitrary value by incorporating a complex ideal transformer into
the lossless 2-port. An arbitrary constant all-pass depends on two real param-
eters (the two elements of Fig. 7.27 or, equivalently, the phase shift and the
reference resistance); when followed by a complex transformer (also depend-
ing on two real parameters), it constitutes the most general constant lossless
2-port, since the latter depends on four real parameters, by 8.59. This can
also be checked by noting that the complex constants f and h are arbitrary,
whereas g has unit modulus; this gives a total of five real parameters, but
this number is'reduced to four by the real relation (75). Finally, in the synthesis
of a passive impedance by means ef a lossless 2-port of minimal degree closed on a
constant resistance, the location of the traf(smission zeros in Re p > 0 is fixed by the
prescribed input impedance, and only the distribution of the zeros in Rep > 0 between
S12 and S21 is free; once a distribution is adopted, the resulting 2-port is unique within
an arbitrary constant lossless 2-port at the output. Nonminimal solutions are obtained
by incorporating arbitrary Hurwitz common factors in h and g and are
equivalent to the cascade combination ef a minimal solution with an arbitrary all-pass
at the output. The same results hold for the synthesis of a real impedance, but
the constant lossless 2-port reduces to a real transformer.
38. In 6 and 12, the lossless 2-port of minimal degree was obtained as a
cascade of simple sections, whereas in the present process it is obtained in
one step. In view of the preceding theorem, however, both methods must be
equivalent and yield the same number of distinct solutions, within the arbi-
trary constant 2-port at the output. In the iterative process, each section
corresponds to one zero Po in Rep> 0 of (7) and coincides with the trans-
mission zero of the extracted factor (6.37), but each zero can be arbitrarily
attributed to the direction 1-2 or 2-1 by changing the gyrator polarity. This
freedom disappears, however, in the case of a zero of (7) on the imaginary
axis, for the extracted section then becomes reciprocal. The totality of the
zeros in Rep> 0 of (7) may be smaller than the totality of the transmis-
sion zeros in Rep > 0: this occurs if Z is not minimum-reactance as discussed
at the end of 8. The number ofzeros of (7) is 2 deg Za and reduces to deg Za
if one considers only the zeros in Rep > 0 and one-half of the zeros on the
j-axis. On the other hand, the additional series reactance Zp is reciprocal
and produces deg Zp transmission zeros in each direction (at the poles of
Zp); since these are all on the j-axis, their number is halved and the total
+
number of transmissions zeros in Re p > 0 is deg Za. deg Zp = deg Z =
deg Su= deg gin all cases, in accordance with (95). Finally, although in the
iterative synthesis process two types of freedom were available (order of
extraction of the transmission zeros, gyrator polarity at every extraction in
Rep > 0), only the second type of freedom leads to distinct over-all 2-ports.
Note that the independence of the solution on the order of the extractions
was not established in the iterative process but results from 37.
39. A polynomial] of minimal degree deduced from the irreducible form of

Su = h/g is generally not para-even, thus the lossless 2-port is generally non-
reciprocal. If a reciprocal realization is required (as in Darlington's synthesis),
a Hurwitz common factor must be introduced in hand g to make gg* - hh* =
ff*= f 2 a perfect square. The polynomial gg* - hh* is of the form 00*a 2
where the Hurwitz polynomial 0 groups all the zeros in Rep < 0, where 0*
contains the image zeros in Rep > 0, and where a 2 contains the double zeros
on the imaginary axis; thus a is a product of factors p +}wt, each para-odd,
and a is, therefore, para-even or para-odd. An excess factor p in h and g
appears as an excess factor pp* in gg* - hh*, thus producing pp* 00* a 2 • Since
the excess factor must be Hurwitz, the only way of making a perfect square of
pp* 00* a 2 , by an excess factor of minimal degree, is to adopt p = 0, except
for a constant factor. If one takes p = 0 when a is para-even, the solution
f = 00* a is para-even with a. When a is para-odd, one takes p = j0, and
f = j00* a is again para-even. In the case of real polynomials, tr : i refix
"para" may be omitted, and a is even or odd. The excess factor i~ :..lways
0 in that case, andf = 00* a is even or odd with a.
By 35, the excess factor 0 is interpreted as an additional output all-pass
with respect to a nonreciprocal solution of minimal degree. Consequently,
the reciprocal 2-port is equivalent to a nonreciprocal 2-port producing the
same input impedance, followed by a nonreciprocal all-pass, whose phase-
shifts are designed to make the over-all 2-port reciprocal. In contrast to the
multiplicity of solutions of minimal degree in the nonreciprocal case, the re-
ciprocal 2-port of minimal degree is unique (because of the very process by
which it is now obtained) except for a trivial constant phase-shift (constant
factor inf, which becomes ± 1 in the real case) and except for the normaliza-
tion impedance. In particular, in the realization of a real passive one-port as a
real passive reciprocal 2-port cif minimal degree closed on a resistance, the 2-port is
unique, except for an arbitrary ideal transformer in cascade. Finally, all reciprocal
realizations cif nonminimal degree are obtained by inserting an arbitrary reciprocal all-
pass between the minimal 2-port and the load.
In the iterative Darlington synthesis, the reciprocity of the over-all
2-port was ensured by additional (not degree-reducing) extractions at every
step, but the order of the extractions was arbitrary and the uniqueness of the
resulting over-all 2-port was not established. Note also that the purely
imaginary zeros of gg* - hh* (contained in a 2) do not contribute to the in-
crease of degree in the present synthesis; correspondingly, the Brune sections
extracted at the purely imaginary zeros of (7) were not followed by additional
extractions. Also, a double zero in Rep> 0 of (7) remains a simple zero of
the similar equation on the residual impedance after one extraction, so a
second extraction at the same point is spontaneously degree-reducing and
combines with the first in a reciprocal section if the gyrator polarities are
chosen opposite. Finally, a passive impedance Z ef degree m is realizable as a
reciprocal lossless 2-port ef degree m closed on a resistance ijf all zeros in Re p > 0
+
of Z Z* are ef even multiplicity.
40. If only the entry S12 = f/g of the scattering matrix is prescribed, so are
the polynomials f and g, except for an arbitrary common Hurwitz factor.
The polynomial h is then deduced from the factorization of gg* - ff* but is
not unique since h may have zeros anywhere. Moreover, hh* becomes 1h1 2 at
real frequencies, and (75) then requires lf/gj 2 < 1 which means A12 > 0. If
this condition is not satisfied by the prescribed S12, it will be met after multi-
plication by a suitable real factor k < 1 which corresponds to an additional
flat loss; this is because the expression gg* - kif* tends to gg* fork small and
will then be nonnegative at real frequencies for some sufficiently small k. In
any case, the condition IS12I :S:: 1 at real frequencies is satisfied by any passive,
even dissipative, transmission coefficient. Consequently, any bounded function
can be realized as the transmittance of a lossless 2-port. Solutions of minimal degree
are obtained by taking f/g irreducible. The resulting h is not unique, but
S21 = f*/g and the product S11S22 = -hh*/gg* = ff*/gg* - 1 are. Since the
latter expression involves the sum of the return phases, which is invariant for
all solutions by (6.77), the multiplicity of solutions of minimal degree merely
corresponds to different distributions, between input and output, of the same
total amount of return phase. Note also that the solutions where h is replaced by
-h, -h* or h* correspond to the replacement of the 2-port by its twisted dual, by the
permuted 2-port, or by the permuted twisted dual, respectively. In a solution of non-
minimal degree based on a factor 0 common to f and g, this factor must be
distributed between hand h* by (75). With 0 = IX f], IX in hand f1 in h*, the
polynomials are 1X{Jj, 1X{Jg, 1X{1*, h, which gives the scattering matrix
(96)
,I
l
which shows that the excess factor 0 corresponds to the insertion of all-passes
of transmittance 1 in the direction corresponding to the prescribed S12 and
of transmittance fJ*/fJ at the input and rx*/rx at the output in the opposite
direction. Nothing is changed in the above considerations ifit is necessary to
realize a real lossless 2-port of prescribed bounded real transmittance S12: withf and
g real, conjugate zeros of gg* - ff* must be attributed both to h or both to h*
to form a real polynomial h.
of a reciprocal lossless 2-port of prescribed bounded transmittance

41. In the synthesis
,J must be para-even. To every zero Po = -rxo +jwo in Rep < 0 (rxo > 0)
S12
off must, therefore, correspond a zero - Pri = rxo + jwo in Re p > 0, but
the zeros on the imaginary axis may be simple since a factor p jwo is +
para-odd. Consequently,Jmust be of the formf = 00*a where 0 is Hurwitz
and where a, containing the zeros on the imaginary axis, is para-even of real
or imaginary leading coefficient depending on whether the number of factors
p +jw 0 is even or odd. If only the irreducible form off/g is prescribed, com-
mon factors may be introduced to make f para-even, but these must be
factors of 0 and not of 0*a. Consequently, an irreducible boundedf/g is acceptable
as the transmittance of a reciprocal lossless 2-port if!J is such that, if it vanishes at Po
in Rep < 0, it also vanishes at -P"t. In the case of a real reciprocal 2-port, f is
real even or odd, and so is a.
42. By (6.32) and (78), the expression
(97)
is the attenuation at real frequencies and is the analytic continuation of the

attenuation for general values of p. In the synthesis of lossless 2-ports with
prescribed attenuation, the function if;if;* must therefore be given as a para-
even rational function of p, positive at real frequencies. Such a function is
necessarily of the form hh*/jf*, but its factorization into if;= h/f and its para-
conjugate is not unique, even if h/f is required to be irreducible. In any case,
any attenuation characteristic which is realizable by a (real) passive network is
realizable as the attenuation of a (real) lossless 2-port. If a reciprocal realization
is required, f must be para-even, but this can always be reached by
introducing common factors in h and f Consequently, any (real) passive
attenuation characteristic is realizable by a (real) reciprocal 2-port, possibly at the
cost of an increase of degree. In any case, once f and h are determined,
g is uniquely defined by (75) except for its sign, thus the 2-port is only deter-
mined within duality.
43. For a real symmetric or antimetric 2-port, ipip* is Ti/J 2 • Since ip is even or
odd in p, Ti/J 2 becomes the square rp 2 of a real rational function rp, even or
odd in w. If the prescribed attenuation is given as
A = ½log ( 1 + f 2) (98)
in terms of such an irreducible function, h and fare uniquely determined
except for their separate signs, but any sign combination determines a unique
monic g (a common numerical factor in h and f does not come into con-
sideration since it also appears in g). Consequently the attenuation of a real
reciprocal symmetric or antimetric lossless 2-port determines uniquely the 2-port of
minimal degree, exceptfor duality (signs ofbothfand h changed) or phase reversal
(sign of h/f changed). Note, however, that the prescription of ipip* as a perfect
square does not automatically specify a symmetric or antimetric 2-port: this
only results from the odd or even character of ip itself. Consider, for instance,
the case of a prescribed ipip* = (p 2 - a 2) 2 which normally corresponds to an
antimetric 2-port with h = p 2 - a 2 , f = 1. One obtains, however, the same
ipip* with h = (p - a) 2 ,j = 1 where ip is no longer odd or even. It is, therefore,
possible to construct nonsymmetric 2-ports having the same attenuation as
symmetric or antimetric 2-ports. This additional freedom does not occur if
all zeros of ip are purely imaginary, for conjugate zeros must then remain
grouped in pairs, and the even or odd character of h cannot be destroyed. In
the symmetric case, the determination of g from f and h is made easier
+
because the factorization f 2 - h2 = (f h) (f - h) implicit in (84) halves
the degree of the algebraic equation whose roots determine g. In the
antimetric case, the similar factorization h 2 +f 2 = (h + jf) (h - jf) is of less
use in numerical work since it leads to equations with complex coefficients.
The transfer matrix 9

44. The wave equations (6.24) or
(99)
I
11
t1
''
can be solved in terms of the input quantities
the form
[YI]= [Fn
XI and YI to yield relations of
(100)
XI F21
defining the transfer matrix F = [F;j]. The entries of the dependent and inde-
pendent 2-vectors in (100) have been put in opposite positions in such a way
that the output wave amplitudes coincide with the input wave amplitudes
of a second 2-port cascaded with the first, as is obvious from Fig. I 0. As a
Fm. 9.10
result, the transfer matrix rif a cascade connection is the product rif the individual
transfer matrices. The transformation of (99) into (100) is quite similar to the
one of 4.26 from the impedance matrix to the chain matrix. The expression
of Fin terms of the scattering parameters, analogous to (4.21), is
F- 1 [-det S (101)
- S21 -S22
For a reciprocal 2-port, one has det F = I, a relation similar to (4.23). This can
be checked from ( 101) or deduced from the fact that F is derived from the
chain matrix by the orthogonal transformation (7.69).
45. For a lossless 2-port, (101) and (74) yield
(102)
and F is not para-unitary but satisfies a more complicated condition now to

be derived. From (6.28), losslessness in harmonic state is expressed as
xx-jy=0 or
(103)
In terms of the vectors
(104)
appearing in (100), (103) can be rewritten

b0b-a0a=0 (105)
with 0 = diag { 1, -1 }, the transformation being similar to the one leading to
(3.23). Since (104) represents (100) as b = Fa, (105) becomes a(P0F - 0)a
= 0, which requires P0F = 0 in steady state, and
F0F=0 (106)
for allp, by analytic continuation. It is then easily checked that (106) applied
to (102) yields (75). Also, if (106) holds for two matrices Fa and Fb, it holds
for their product, so relation (75) is an automatic consequence of the similar
relation on the constituents in a cascade connection. A similar remark holds
for reciprocity, by the product of the determinants.
46. We now consider the cascade connection of two lossless 2-ports (of sub-
scripts a and b, respectively, in all polynomials) and denote without subscripts
the polynomials of the combined 2-port. By multiplying the transfer matrices,
one obtains formally the three distinct relations
f=fafb
g = ha*hb + gagb (107)
h = g a* hb + ha gb
but the resulting polynomials are not necessarily canonic, for excess common
factors may be produced in all polynomials g, h, h*,j, andf*. Such factors
are necessarily para-even, and the true canonic form is obtained after their
cancellation. At a zero of gin (107), one has gb/hb=-ha*/ga, that is,
Snb S22a = l, which is impossible in Rep > 0 since S11b and S22a are bounded.
Since the excess zeros of g occur in para-conjugate pairs, they can only occur
on the imaginary axis. On the imaginary axis, the last condition can only be
met if S11b and S22a have unit modulus and opposite phases, which means
that the impedances (a and (b, seen from the interconnection port (Fig. 11)
a b
Fm. 9.11
with the component 2-ports terminated at the opposite ends, are purely
imaginary and conjugate, and this can only occur at a common imaginary
transmission zero of the component 2-ports. In the absence of excess factors
in g, the degree of g in (107) is the sum of the degrees of ga and gb, so the
degrees add up, and the total set qf transmission zeros in Re > 0 remains invariant in
a cascade combination of lossless 2-ports, except if at a common transmission zero on
the imaginary axis conjugate matching occurs at the interconnection. That such a can-
cellation can occur is obvious from the example of two identical shunt
reactances.
47. The problem of realizing a lossless 2-port as a cascade combination of

two lossless 2-ports is equivalent to the factorization of a transfer matrix of
the type (102) into two matrices ofa similar type. We assume that the over-all
2-port is all-pass free at both ends, for the extraction of all-passes has been
completely solved in 35. Consequently, ff*/g 2 is irreducible and the over-all
2-port, assumed of degree m, has a total of 2m transmission zeros, m in each
half-plane. If excess transmission zeros in the component 2-ports are to be
avoided, the extracted 2-port must have some 2ma of the 2m transmission
zeros of the over-all network (ma in each half-plane), and the remaining
2-port has the remaining 2(m - ma) zeros. The distribution of the finite zeros
offbetweenfa andfb defines these polynomials except for an arbitrary lead-
ing coefficient. On the other hand, the distribution of the transmission zeros
at infinity fixes the degrees of ga and gb. At all 2ma transmission zeros Pt
(including the ones at infinity) of the first network, its input reflectance Sna
is equal to the known input reflectance Sn of the over-all network, and this
imposes 2ma linear equations
(108)
on the unknown coefficients of the polynomials ha and ga. Since these poly-
nomials are at most of degree ma, they contain at most ma +
I coefficients,
and the leading coefficients, in addition to the one offa, are free. This gives
three complex, thus six real, free parameters, but this number is reduced to
four by the real condition (75) at infinity and by the fact that the leading
coefficient of ga has unit modulus. This shows that the network fa, ha, ga is
uniquely determined within an arbitrary constant lossless 2-port, which has
four parameters by 37. In the case of multiple transmission zeros, the rela-
tions (108) are not all distinct but additional relations are obtained by im-
posing contacts of appropriate orders between Sn and Sna. For instance,
a double zero Pt may be considered as arising from the confluence of two
+
simple zeros at Pt and Pt e; replacing the second relation ( 108) by its
difference with the first, one obtains
where the prime denotes the derivative.
48. The preceding considerations were heuristic, and the possibility of a

cascade decomposition based on a prescribed partition of the transmission
zeros will only be established if we prove that ga and gb are both Hurwitz
and that condition (75) is satisfied for both component 2-ports; moreover,
the uniqueness of the decomposition within an arbitrary constant lossless
2-port, suggested by the parameter count in 47, is only rigorously established
by showing that the 2ma relations ( I 08) are independent.
It is easy to establish (75) for the extracted 2-port. At any transmission
zero p, of the over-all 2-port, one has
(109)
so that haha* -gaga* vanishes by (108) at the zeros offa]a*, and (75) is
automatically satisfied at 2ma points, which is sufficient to establish it
identically. If the leading coefficient offa is not zero, one then deduces (75)
for the second component 2-port by the last remark of 45.
However, it is difficult to complete the proof and, in particular, to estab-
lish the Hurwitz character of ga and gb, by a direct analysis. In the following
we supply an indirect iterative proof by showing that the extraction of a
I section of degree I with a single transmission zero is always possible and unique
;.!
within an arbitrary lossless 2-port of degree 0. In particular, we will show
that, with an adequate specification of the 2-port of degree 0, the extracted
I•
I• 2-port of degree I becomes identical to Fig. 2, so that the decomposition of
a lossless 2-port into sections of degree I will turn out to be identical to the
iterative synthesis of the input impedance of the terminated 2-port by the
method of 6, which is known to yield realizable sections independently of the
order in which the transmis_sion zeros are extracted. The uniqueness of the
decomposition then results from 37.
49. The section of Fig. 2 degenerates into a straight connection from input to
output for p = oo. Consider a lossless 2-port of degree I with g(p) = g0 p + g 1
and similar notations for the other polynomials. If it is to be transparent at
infinity, one must have Su( oo) = S22 ( oo) = 0, hence ho= 0. On the other
hand, S12 ( oo) = fo/g 0 = I and S21 ( oo) = -J0* /g0 = I require fo = ±j, since
go has unit modulus. Arbitrarily adopting the upper sign, one then also has
go = j by the last conditions. With a slightly different notation, the canonic
polynomials become
J =i(P-Po); g =i(P-Pi); h=h1 (110)

and the transmission zeros are at Po (zero off) and -pt (zero off*). Let
S11 (p0) be a, so that S11 (-Pti) is 1/a* by (109). The relations (108) are
h1 = ja(Po - Pi); h1 = -j(pt +Pi) /a (111)

Eliminating a, one obtains
(112)
With the notations

Po=ao +jwo; (113)
the separation of real and imaginary parts of (112) yields
w1 = wo; /3~ + /3i = ai - a~ (114)

Finally, the normalized impedance matrix deduced from ( 110) by (80) is
1 [P - jwo - jf3o p-jwo-ao] (115)

z = - a1 + /31 P - jwo + f3o P -jwo +jf]o
In the notations of 1, the transmission zero is Po, if we assume ao > 0, and is
thus the zero off in (110). The input impedance at Po is (1), and its
reflectance with respect to Ro defines
jXo
a=---- ( 116)
2Ro +jXo
By (111), we identify this with h1/j(po -Pi)- By (113) and (114), this ex-
pression becomes successively -j(/30 +j/31) / (ao - a1) = j( ao + a1) / (/30 - j/31),
and the identification with (116) gives
f3o _ 2Ro . /31 _ 1 (117)

cxo + a1 - Xo ' ao + a1 - -
After elimination of f3 0 and f31 with the last relation (114), one obtains
(1 + 4R~/X~) (a0 + a1) = a1 - ao
hence
and ( 11 7) then gives

f3o = -aoXo/Ro; (118)
With these values, ( 115) is identical to the transpose of (9) normalized to
Ro, and the extracted section is thus Fig. 2 with the gyrator reversed.
50. The above considerations combined with the results of 2-6 prove that
any factorization off into linear factors permits a corresponding factorization of a
matrix of the form (102), sati.ifying (75), into similar matrices of degree I. It is clear
that the similar factorization theorems hold in the real domain (in terms of
elementary matrices of degree I and 2) and in the real reciprocal domain
(elementary matrices of degree I, 2, and 4), by analogy with the correspond-
ing results of 12 and 13, respectively. Correspondingly, any (real) (reciprocal)
lossless 2-port is realizable as a cascade of simple sections of the types discussed in the
iterative synthesis ,if one-ports: the cascade decomposition is unique if the order ,if the
zeros ,iff is prescribed and if the arbitrariness resulting from the existence ,if sections
of degree O is suitably removed to the end.
More generally, a factorizationf = fafb into factors of arbitrary degree
induces a corresponding factorization of the matrix ( 102) into two matrices
of the same type: it is sufficient to extract the linear factors offa one by one,
and then recombine the results. It is also clear that the resulting component
lossless 2-ports, whose cascade connection produces the original 2-port, are
unique within an arbritary constant 2-port which can be shifted from one
component 2-port into the other. In particular, if the first component 2-port
is specified to be transparent at infinity, it is unique and independent of the
order in which the linear factors have been extracted. The extraction can
actually be made globally (and then yields a unique result) if it is based on
Eqs. ( 108) combined with the condition of transparency at infinity which
define the leading coefficients.
I
Halving a symmetric lossless 2-port 10

51. We now discuss the possibility of realizing a given symmetric (possibly
complex) lossless 2-port as the cascade of two lossless 2-ports (possibly com-
plex and nonreciprocal) which are mirror images of each other with respect
to the interconnection port. It is clear that, if a solution exists, a set of new
solutions is obtained by incorporating an arbitrary ideal transformer (possibly
complex) in one 2-port, and its image of inverse ratio in the second 2-port.
The over-all 2-port is assumed to be specified by its lattice impedances
Z1 and Z2. If a common 2-port N can be extracted from Z1 and Z2, as in
Figs. 7 .35 and 7 .36, in such a way that the degree of at least one of the residual
impedances (Za or Zb) is decreased, while the other is not increased, the
halving of the original 2-port is reduced to the halving of the central 2-port
of Fig. 7.34, which is oflower degree, and the solution is achieved by iteration
until one of the impedances is reduced to a short circuit or to an open circuit.
With Za = oo, the lattice is reduced to a series impedance 2Zb which is
halved into two impedances Zb. With Zb = oo, the situation is the same
except for an additional 180° phase-shift which is halved into two gyrators
as in Fig. 4.19. The situations with Za = 0 or Zb = 0 are similar, except that
the residual impedance is in shunt.
52. We now describe a degree-reducing algorithm allowing one to extract a

common 2-port N from two arbitrary passive para-odd impedances, Z 1 and
Z 2 • By 7.79 all the roots in Rep> 0 of
(119)
including the roots at infinity, are transmission zeros in both directions of

the 2-port to be halved, since the denominator of (7. 79) cannot vanish in
Rep ;?: 0. Since Z1 and Z2 are para-odd, every zero Po with Re Po > 0 of
(119) is paired with a zero -Pt in Rep< 0. On the other hand, zeros of
(119) on the imaginary axis may be simple, and this includes, in particular,
common poles of Z1 and Z2. Consider first a zerojwo of (119) on the imagi-
nary axis. If Z1(jwo) = Z2(jwo) = oo, extract in series from Z1 and Z2 a term
h/(p + jw 0 ), or hp if w 0 = oo, h being taken as that residue which is the
smaller. This decreases by one the degree of the impedance undergoing a
total extraction and does not alter the degree of the other impedance. If both
Z 1 or Z 2 are finite atjw 0 , one has Z1(jwo) = Z2(jwo) = jXo. After extraction
ofjX0 from both impedances, the residual admittances have a common pole
at jw 0 and a suitable term h/ (p + jwo) is extracted in parallel. Consider
next a zero Po of (119) with Re Po> 0, so that one has Z1(Po) = Z2(Po) =
Ro + jX0 • The extraction process of 2 works both on Z1 and Z2 with the
same parameters (the gyrator polarity is arbitrary but the same for both)
and is degree-reducing for both impedances, since (7) is identically satisfied
for para-odd functions. Finally, if (119) has no roots in Rep> 0 (including
infinity), Z 1 and Z 2 are constants, since roots in Rep < 0 alone are impossible,
and one of the impedances is reduced to zero by extracting a common con-
stant imaginary resistance. Note, in addition, that the extraction at jwo
is degree-reducing for both impedances (admittances), if they have the same
residue at their common pole, that is, ifjwo is a double root of (119).
53. The total number m of transmission zeros, including the zeros at infinity,
is the number of roots of ( 119) or, equivalently, of Z1/ Z2 = 1 before cancel-
lation of common factors in Z1/ Z2 . It is, therefore, the degree of Z1/ Z2
before cancellation, that is, deg Z1 + deg 2 2 which is the degree of the 2-port
to be halved, by 34. Let m' be the number of distinct transmission zeros of
odd multiplicity on the imaginary axis (including the point at infinity). In
addition, there are (m - m')/2 transmission zeros in Rep> 0, counting the
double zeros on the imaginary axis for half their order, paired with an
identical number of zeros in Re p s 0. The iterative process uses in N one
reactive element for each of the m' extractions and also one reactive element
for each of the (m - m')/2 extractions, so that the degree of the resulting half
network is m' + (m - m')/2 = (m + m')/2. Finally, a symmetric lossless 2-port
can be halved into two 2-ports each of degree (m + m')/2, where m' is the number of
distinct zeros of odd multiplicity of ( 119) on the imaginary axis, including infinity. If,
however, realizations of the type shown in Figs. 12 or 13 are allowed (where
the last series or shunt reactance at the end of the extraction process is not
halved), the degree of the over-all realization may fall below m + m'.
z
N N
Fm. 9.12
54. We next want to solve the halving problem by making use ofreciprocal
elements only, and to find out when such a reciprocal halving of a given sym-
metric 2-port is possible. First of all, the decomposition of a 180° phase-shift
into two gyrators then becomes forbidden, but if complex resistances are
,, accepted, a decomposition into two reciprocal 90° phase-shift is still possible.
By (7.86) with <p = 77/2, giving the normalized lattice impedance z = ~j,
the lattice impedances of a reciprocal all-pass of phase-shift 77/2 and reference
resistance R are Z1 = ~jR, Z2 = jR. By 4.35, such a lattice is equivalent to
the dualizer of Fig. 4.41 with Z = jR. On the other hand, a reciprocal all-
pass of phase-shift 7T is Fig. 1.17. Consequently, the 2-port of Fig. 1.17 is
equivalent to the cascade connection of two dualizers.
If the component 2-ports Nin Figs. 12 and 13 are reciprocal, their trans-
mission zeros are identical in both directions and, by virtue of theorem 46,
the transmission zeros of the over-all 2-port in each direction are double,
except possibly on the imaginary axis. This restricts a priori the class of re-
ciprocally halvable symmetric 2-ports, but we will now show that every
2-port of this class is halvable, if imaginary resistances are allowed. It is
sufficient to apply the iterative process of 52: since every transmission zero
in Re p0 > 0 is double, two sections with opposite gyrator polarities can be
N N
Fm. 9.13
extracted from each canonic impedance and combined into a reciprocal

section; on the other hand, the extractions at jwo lead to reciprocal sections.
Consequently, a lossless symmetric 2-port can be halved into reciprocal 2-ports ijJ all
its transmission zeros in each direction outside the imaginary axis are double; the degree
of the half-network is (m + m') /2, as above. ·
55. For a real 2-port, every extraction at a complex frequency can be followed
by a conjugate extraction, and the results combine into real Darlington or
Brune sections. Consequently, the last theorem also holds in terms of real
reciprocal component 2-ports, provided there remains no 180° phase-shift.
This requires the phase of B12 = B21 of the original symmetric 2-port to be
an odd function of the frequency, and the requirement is satisfied if one has
B12(0) = 0 or B12( oo) = 0. Since S12(P) behaves in the neighborhood ofp = 0
as kpr with some power r ~ 0, one has B12(0) = [B12( -0) + B12( +0)]/2 =
arg k, and the above condition requires k > 0. Consequently, S1 2 is positive
for small positive p and remains nonnegative on the whole real p-axis, since
S12 has no zero of odd multiplicity on this axis. Finally, the halving is possible
if S12(P) ~ 0for allp > 0. By (7.76), this is equivalent t0S1 > S2, or Z1 > Z 2
on the positive p-axis.
56. The halving problem has thus been solved iteratively and apparently
gives a finite number of solutions, depending on the order of the extractions
(and on the choice of gyrator polarities in the nonreciprocal case), in addition
to the arbitrary transformer mentioned in the beginning of 51. We next solve
the halving problem by a global method and hence establish the equivalence
of the solutions based on different extraction orders. We therefore return to
the general (complex, nonreciprocal) case and first establish a few lemmas.
By (85) and its para-conjugate, one has 2h = ga g/3* =f ga*g/3 for a sym-
metric 2-port. By comparison with g = gag/3, the common factors of hand g
are the common factors of ga and g/3, that is, of the denominators of the
reflectances (86-87) of the lattice impedances. Consequently, a symmetric loss-
less 2-port is all-pass free (necessarily at both ends) relatively to some nominal
resistance R ijJ the denominators (and the numerators) of its lattice reflectances are
coprime. If a symmetric 2-port of given lattice impedances Z 1 and Z 2 is to be
halved, one may first compute the reflectances S1 and S2 relatively to some R,
find their largest common all-pass factor, and extract it at both ends, as in
Fig. 7.34. The residual symmetric 2-port to be halved is then all-pass free.
Moreover, if the original 2-port has only double transmission zeros in each
direction outside the imaginary axis, the largest all-pass factor common to S 1
and S2 is a perfect square, and the extracted all-passes of Fig. 7.34 can be
taken reciprocal. Further discussion is, therefore, limited to the halving of
all-pass-free symmetric 2-ports.
57. Assume that a given symmetric lossless 2-port of lattice impedances Z1

and Z2 has been halved. By Bartlett's theorem, the input impedances of the
left half-network, respectively open- and short-circuited at its output, are
Z1 and Z 2 • In terms of the parameters of the normalized impedance· and
admittance matrices of the left half-network, this yields
zu = z1; ( 120)
Consequently, the problem of halving a symmetric lossless 2-port is equivalent to the
problem of constructing a lossless 2-port with prescribed zu and yu. Let s2 be the
output impedance of the left half-network terminated on R at its input. Set
t1 = det z, hence yu = z22/!1. Eliminating z22 from the expression of s2
similar to (4.35), one obtains
S2 = z 22 _ z12 z21 t1(1 + yu)

zu + I 1 + zu
Since zu andyu are para-odd, whereas t1 is para-even, t1 cancels in the ratio
t2 (1 - zu)(l + yu)
~2* (l+zu)(l-yu)
By (120) and (7.77), this becomes
s2/s2* = -s11s2 ( I 21)

and ( 121) is irreducible if the 2-port to be halved is all-pass free.
58. The function if;= s2/s2* satisfies ff*= I; if an arbitrary irreducible

rational function if; satisfying ff* = I is given, its denominator can be fac-
tored into rx./3*, where rx. and /3 are Hurwitz polynomials, and its numerator
is necessarily rx.*{3. Since S1 and S2 are bounded para-unitary and without
common factors, one must have S1 = rx.*/rx., S2 = -/3*//3, within a common
constant factor of unit modulus. In conclusion, the reflectances S1 and S2
without all-pass factors determine an irreducible if; and, conversely, if; deter-
mines S1 and S2, within a common constant factor of unit modulus. In the
halving problem, the latter corresponds to an arbitrary constant all-pass at
both ends, as in Fig. 7.34. On the other hand, by 5.40, the knowledge of
s 2/s 2* determines a passive irreducible impedance s2 uniquely, except for a
constant real factor which corresponds to the square of the modulus of the
ratio of the arbitrary ideal transformer mentioned in 51. If sz is then realized
as the output impedance of a lossless 2-port terminated on Rat its input, and
all-pass free at the input, this 2-port is a solution of the halving problem of
the symmetric 2-port of lattice reflectances S1 and S2 related to s2 by (121).
The realization of s2 in the prescribed form is known to be unique, except
for the arbitrary polarity of each gyrator and an arbitrary constant all-pass
at the input. The latter corresponds to the arbitrary constant factor of unit
modulus common to S1 and S2, whereas the polarity of each gyrator was
already arbitrary in the iterative solution of the halving problem; the present
method shows, however, that the order of extraction in the iterative method
has no effect. Note also that the transmission zeros, which are the roots of
( 119), hence of S1 = S2, correspond by ( 121) either to roots of ( 2 + ( 2* = 0
or to poles of (2, so the same roots occur in the solution of the halving problem
based on the synthesis of (2.
59. In (121), one has m=deg f =deg S1 +deg S2, since f is irreducible,
and m = deg Z1 + deg Z2 is the degree of the 2-port to be halved. On the
other hand, the roots of f = -1 are the ones of S1 = S2 , hence of ( 119).
Consequently, the number of distinct roots of odd multiplicity on the
imaginary axis (infinity included) of ( 119), called m' in the iterative process,
only differs from the similar number of roots off= -1 (infinity excluded),
called mo in 5.41, if f = -1 has a root of odd multiplicity at infinity. This
means that 00 , hence also 0 = arg z, has a jump of 7T at infinity, so z has then
a zero or a pole at infinity, which corresponds toe= 1/2 in (5.63). Finally,
one has m' =mo+ 2e, and (5.64) becomes (m + m')/2 as in the iterative
method.
The exceptional case f = -1 has a simple interpretation in the halving
problem. One then has S1 = S2 in (121), and both reflectances are constant
since their ratio was assumed irreducible. The symmetric lattice is then a
balanced bridge of constant reactances and can be halved into two such
bridges separated by an arbitrary symmetric lossless 2-port, and (2 is then
an arbitrary reactance.
60. The solution of the halving problem through the realization of ( 2 as the
output impedance of a lossless 2-port is thus complete in the general case.
We now apply the global method to the case where the half-network is re-
quired to be reciprocal (but not yet real). All the transmission zeros of the
full network outside the imaginary axis must be double in each direction,
and all roots of (2 + (2* in Rep > 0 are then double. By the last theorem 39,
( 2 is then realizable by a lossless reciprocal 2-port of degree equal to the
degree of (2, and this 2-port is unique within an arbitrary constant reciprocal
all-pass at the output. Consequently, the solution of the reciprocal halving problem,
if it exists, is unique within an arbitrary constant reciprocal all-pass at the input and an
arbitrary real transformer at the output; complex transformers are excluded since
they are nonreciprocal.
The solution of the real reciprocal halving problem (assuming that the 2-port
to be halved is itselfreal) by the global method requires only one additional
.I
remark. The left-hand member of (121) determines only S1 and S2 within

an arbitrary common ± sign; the choice of the negative sign is equivalent
to introducing at both ends a reciprocal all-pass of phase-shift equal to 1r/2
in each direction, and such an all-pass does not exist in the real domain.
Consequently, only one of the solutions (S1, S2) or ( -S1, -S2) is realizable;
from the earlier discussion it is clear that the correct solution is the one satis-
fying S1 > S2 for all real p > 0. Note also that if the 2-port of lattice
impedances Z1, Z 2 is halvable, the similar network with an additional phase-
shift of 1r(Z1 and Z 2 permuted) is not, and conversely. On the other hand,
the 2-port ( -Si, -S2) is the dual of (S1, S2), thus the dual of a halvable
2-port is not halvable, and conversely. Combining both results, a 2-port and
its twisted dual are simultaneously halvable or nonhalvable: twisted duality
replaces (S1, S2) by (-S2, -S1) and s2 by lfs2 in (121).
61. Let 6 =6= e±j"/2 = ±j in (90), which becomes

[ Su ±JS12] (122)
±JS21 -S22
and is antimetric (but complex) if the original matrix was symmetric, and
conversely. Consequently, a symmetric 2-port in cascade with a reciprocal all-pass
ofphase-shift ±1r/2 is antimetric, and conversely. If the 2-port of scattering matrix
(122) is preceded by a reciprocal all-pass of phase-shift ~1r/2, row and
column one of (122) are multiplied by ~ j, and the matrix becomes
[-~:~ -~::]
which corresponds to the twisted dual of the original 2-port. Consequently,
a 2-port inserted between a reciprocal all-pass of phase-shift ~1r/2 and an all-pass of
phase-shift ±1r/2 is tran.iformed into its twisted dual.
62. Let A be an arbitrary antimetric lossless 2-port. The cascade combination

noted symbolically
S = {A, 1r/2} (123)
is symmetric, and can be halved into
S= {H, Hin1} (124)
where H;m denotes the mirror image of H, so that the original antimetric
2-port is realized as
A = {H, H;m, -1r/2} (125)
Inserting three reciprocal all-passes with zero total phase-shift between H
and H;m, one obtains
A= {H, -1r/4, 1r/2, -1r/4, Hinl, -1r/2} = {B, C}
~
11
:1
Open-circuit behavior 299
where
B = {H, -71"/4} ( 126)
and where C is the twisted dual of B;m = { -71"/4, H;m} by virtue of the last
theorem. Consequently, an arbitrary antimetric lossless 2-port can be realized as a
cascade of a lossless 2-port and the twisted dual of its image. If the antimetric 2-port
has only double transmission zeros in each direction, except on the imaginary axis, ( 122)
satisfies the condition of reciprocal halvability and H is reciprocal in ( 124).
Consequently, (124) is reciprocal, and the realization of the last theorem is re-
ciprocal, but generally not real. If, in addition, the antimetric 2-port is real, the
realization is real. This is proved as follows. The reality of ( 125) requires
{H, H;m, -71"/2} = {H*, H;:n, 71"/2}
hence
or
(127)
since a reciprocal phase-shift of 71" represents a crossed connection and can
be permuted with any 2-port. Both sides of (127) represent halved realiza-
tions of symmetric 2-ports, the left half-networks being {H, -71"/2} and H*,
respectively, so that an identical solution to both problems certainly exists,
for which
{H, -71"/2} = H*
hence
{H, -71"/4}= {H*,71"/4}
which expresses that (126) is real.
Open-circuit behavior
63. For a 2-port of impedance matrix Z operating between a generator e of
internal impedance R1 at the input and opened at the input, the impedance
equations with i 2 = 0 become
and the open-circuit voltage ratio is

V2 Z21
N------- (128)
- e - Zn +R1
If all entries of Z are normalized with respect to R1, this becomes
z21
N=-- (129)
z11 1 +
At a pole of the entries of Z on the imaginary axis, the residue matrix is

hermitian positive definite by 7.4, so that one has h12 = ht1 and
(130)
This is impossible with h21 =I= 0 and hn = 0, so N takes the finite value h21/hn
at such a pole. On the other hand, N has no poles arising from z21 = oo in
z
Re p > 0 and no poles in Re p O arising from zn = -1. Consequently,
the open-circuit voltage ratio of a passive 2-port is hurwitzian of the form J/g where
g is a Hurwitz polynomial which may be assumed monic and where degf:::;;:
deg g. The voltage ratio need not be a bounded function since an ideal
transformer at the output may give an arbitrary voltage gain.
64. The impedance matrix of a lossless 2-port is skew para-hermitian, thus

one has, in particular,
( 131)
Let d be the least common denominator of zn and z21, and ntJ be the nu-
merator of ZiJ. Since the poles of Z are simple and all on the imaginary axis,
+
dis a product of factors p jwi, hence para-even or para-odd. This, and the
first relation ( 131), give
(132)
lff/g is not assumed irreducible, its identification with (129) can be made
separately for numerator and denominator to yield
g=nn +d; (133)
By combining the first equation ( 133) with its para-conjugate, and taking
( 132) into account, one obtains
hence, using the second equations (133) and (131),
2f
Z21 = - - - ; (134)
g±g*
Since g is Hurwitz, ±g*/g is bounded para-unitary, and, its transform zn by
(6.10) is a reactance. Since one of the polynomials g ± g* and g g* has +
the degree of g and since the other has a degree smaller by one unit, the
degree of zn is deg g in all cases, and zn has exactly deg g poles on the
imaginary axis (including infinity) with strictly positive residues. Since z21
and z 12 have no poles other than the ones of zn (the denominators are
identical and a pole at infinity can only occur simultaneously if the leading
Open-circuit behavior 30 I
coefficient of g ± g* vanishes due to deg f ~ deg g), it is always possible to

determine a minimal z22 by attributing to it the same poles with residues h22
deduced from the limiting equality in (130), that is, by
(135)
which gives a positive real finite residue, since all hn are strictly positive. It is
obvious that an arbitrary reactance can be added in series at the output
without affecting the open-circuit behavior. The impedance matrix of the
solution without excess output reactance is the sum of its unipolar compo-
nents, each of rank l by ( 135), hence of degree 1, and the degree of Z is
deg g. The normalized output impedance of this minimal 2-port terminated
on R1 at its input is
S2 = zzz _ z12 z21 = znz22 - z12 z21 + z22 (136)

zn + 1 zn + 1
At a pole of the Zij on the imaginary axis, ( 136) takes the finite value
h22 /h 11 = h21 h;1/hi 1, owing to (135), and can have no other poles on the
imaginary axis, and so (2 is minimum-reactance. To conclude, any (real)
hurwitzianfunctionf/g can be realized as the open-circuit voltage ratio of a (real) loss-
less 2-port; the solution of minimum degree is minimum-reactance at the output, and
its degree is deg g when f/g is taken as irreducible. If a reciprocal realization is
required,fmust be para-even or para-odd to produce z12 = z21 in (134), and
the discussion is similar to the one made on S12 in 41. Note, finally, that (136)
gives
z12 z12* 2jf*

------- = - = 2NN*
(1 +zn)(l -zn) gg*
(137)
so that the para-even part of the output impedance is known from the pre-
scribed voltage ratio; the minimum-reactance para-odd part can then be
determined as in 5.36. Since ( 137) is normalized to R, the real part of the
output impedance at real frequencies is R1 Re (2 = R1 INI 2. The 2-port seen
from its output is, therefore, a generator of maximum available power
jv 2 j2/R 1jNj 2 = jej 2 /R1, by (128), as expected since the 2-port is lossless.
65. The above results may be related to the theory of 29-30 by computing
the limiting form of the scattering matrix for R 2 = oo. The reflection co-
efficient S22 between any finite impedance and the infinite load is -1, hence
one has
(138)
,II
in (74), and (75) givesf = 0. The voltage ratio (128) and the transmittance
S12 = 2v2JR1/ejI& defined by (6.26) are related by
S12 = 2N(R1/R2) 112
With S12 = f/g, this gives N = f' /g with
f' = (R2/R1) 112.f/2 (139)
which is of the form oo · 0 and corresponds to the polynomial called fin 63.
It is easily checked that with these notations (138) and (139) transform (80),
denormalized by Zt; = ZtJ(RtR1) 112 , into (134) with the lower signs (the
opposite signs are obtained by multiplyingf and g by j, for g was not assumed
monic in (29)). The resulting expression for Z22 is still indeterminate; a
second application ofl'Hospital's rule yields (137).
The analogous cases of input open-circuit or short-circuit behavior
correspond to the following cases in (74):
I'
,! R2 =oo; g=h*
R2=0; g= -h*
I• (140)
11;
R1 =OO; g=h
R1=0; g= -h
chapter I0
Synthesis of passive n-ports
Principles of the iterative synthesis

1. The next three chapters are devoted to the synthesis of passive n-ports by
the three methods already used in the one-port case. The first method
described in this chapter is the extension of the iterative method of Chap. 5
and yields canonic realizations containing more than the minimum number
ofresistances. 1 The second method is based on all-pass n-port extractions and
realizes an n-port of degree m as a lossless 2n-port of degree m closed on an
n-port of degree O; but the lossless 2n-port is generally nonreciprocal, even if
the prescribed n-port is reciprocal, and a similar reciprocal synthesis is
achieved only at the cost of an increase of degree. The second method is
worked out iteratively in Chap. 11, thus extending the results of9.1-18, and
globally in Chap. 12, thus extending the results of 9.37-39.
2. We assume that the passive (complex, nonreciprocal) n-port is specified

by its not identically singular impedance matrix Z(p), since degenerate and
doubly degenerate cases have been treated in 7.12 and 7.25. We further
+
assume that 2R = Z Z is not identically singular, for otherwise the reduc-
tion process based on theorem 7.14 applies. We call Z(p) resistance-reduced
if R is at least locally singular on the imaginary axis. The iterative synthesis
begins with a resistance extraction based on the following theorem.
3. If Z is a nonreduced positive (real, symmetric) matrix ,if dimension n, one can

determine a matrix Ra= r + On-1 with r > 0 such that Z1 = Z - Ra is positive
(real, symmetric) and resistance-reduced. 2 Since, by hypothesis, R has rank n on
303
304 I0. Synthesis of passive n-ports
the imaginary axis, it has rank n everywhere in Rep~ 0, by 7.15, and is thus
hermitian strictly positive definite. All principal minors of R are thus strictly
positive for all Rep> 0. Define R1 = ½[Z1(P) + Z1(P)] = R -Ra. The
principal minors of R1 constructed on the last 1, 2, ... , n - 1 rows and
columns are identical to the corresponding minors of R and are, therefore,
strictly positive. The matrix R1 will thus remain positive as long as its deter-
minant remains nonnegative everywhere on the imaginary axis. This yields
a condition of the form
r < /).j /).11 (1)
where /). is the determinant of R and /).11 the principal minor of R based
on then - 1 last rows and columns. Finally, the value of r is equated to the
minimum of the right-hand member of ( 1) on the imaginary axis. Let jw 0
denote the point (or one of the points) where the equality holds in ( 1) ; the
resistance-reduced matrix Z1 is a positive matrix, and R1 is singular atjw 0 •
Moreover, one has deg Z 1 = deg Z.
4. Now let Z(p) be resistance-reduced, such that det R vanishes at least at

one point Po = jwo of the j-axis. We assume that Z has no pole at jw 0 , other-
wise this pole can be extracted as in 7.5, and the corresponding lossless
impedance matrix realized as in 7.33. Write Z(po) = Zo +
Qo where Ro and
Qo are the hermitian and skew-hermitian parts at Po, as m (7.14). With
Qo = jXo, X 0 is then finite and hermitian, and one has
Z(Po) = Zo =Ro+ jXo (2)
We further assume that Zo is nonsingular, for otherwise z-1 would have a
pole atjwo which could be extracted.
5. Since Ro is singular, there exists a nonzero vector u such that

Rou =0 (3)
On the other hand, the matrix Z1(P) = Z(p) - jX1 is positive with Z(p) for
an arbitrary hermitian X1. If Z1(Po) can be made singular, its inverse Y1(P)
has a pole atjwo which can be extracted by writing
(4)
with H hermitian positive definite and deg Y2 = deg Y1 - rank H = deg Z
-rank H. Since Z1(Po) =Ro+ j(Xo -X1), one has Z1(Po)u = 0, owing to
(3), if X1, which was arbitrary, is chosen in such a way that
(5)
and this is always possible, for instance by adopting X1 = X 0 • In any case, (4)
combined with
Principles of the iterative synthesis 305
shows that the resistance reduced matrix Z(p) is realized by the circuit of
Fig. l where each block represents an n-port of an impedance or admittance
matrix as specified on the figure. The previous developments implicitly
assumed w 0 -=jc. oo; in the case wo = oo, the term H/(p - Jwo) is simply
replaced by Hp in (4).
Z= jX1
H
Y=---
p- jwo
Fm. 10.l
6. Since the degree of the impedance matrix is reduced in the process of

Fig. l, the iterative application of this process, combined with preliminary
resistance reduction, and possibly with the other reduction processes of
Chap. 7, ultimately yields an impedance matrix of degree 0, realized in
7.30. Consequently, any positive matrix is realizable as the impedance matrix of a
concrete passive n-port. Due to the general theorems of Chap. 7, this is also true
for any prescribed positive hybrid matrix, or for any bounded matrix, pre-
scribed as a scattering matrix. The process reduces to the one of 5.25 in the
one-port case.
The number of complex parameters of a general matrix of degree m and
order n is (8. l O1), so that a canonic synthesis procedure should use 2n
complex, or 4n real parameters per unit of degree. In Fig. l, the degree
reduction is the rank of H which is at least one. Even when the rank of His
larger than one, the extraction in (4) maybe limited toa matrixH0 /(p -Jw 0 ),
with Ho of rank l but contained in H, owing to the last remark of A.37. With
this modification, the degree reduction is by one unit in all cases and, in order
to be canonic, the extracted section must involve 4n - l real parameters, since
one parameter has been consumed in the preliminary resistance reduction.
Since X1 in Fig. l is an arbitrary hermitian matrix, it is clear that the canonic
number is exceeded. As in 5.30, however, one may extract an arbitrary
constant skew-hermitian matrix JX2 from the residual impedance Z 2 (p) of
Fig. l and replace Z2(P) by Z 3 (p) - JX2, which is still a positive matrix of
identical degree. The extracted section of degree l is then that of Fig. 2,
and it remains to determine a solution X1 of (5) and a suitable X2 in such a
way that the section of Fig. 2 depends on 4n - l parameters. Since the
Z= jX1 Z=jX2
Y= Ho
p-j
FIG. 10.2
matrices X1, X2, and Ho are generally singular, the 2n-port of Fig. 2 has
neither an admittance nor an impedance matrix and will be characterized by
its chain equations of the type (4.19).
7. The chain matrix of a 2n-port reducing to a series n-port arm from input
to output, of impedance matrix Z, is
~l (6)
as results immediately from the equations i1 = -i2 and v2 - v1 = Zi2.

Similarly, for a shunt arm of admittance matrix Y, the chain matrix is
(7)
By multiplying the chain matrices of the three branches of Fig. 2 in the order
of connection, one obtains the chain matrix of the complete 2n-port as
J(X1 + X2) - qX1HoX2l (8)

ln + jqHoX2
where q is an abbreviation for (p - Jwo)- 1 .
The hermitian positive definite matrix Ho of rank 1 is of the form
Ho=hh (9)
where h is an n-vector, defined only within a complex scalar, and hence
containing n - 1 complex parameters. Defining the vector
( 10)
one has X1Ho = xh by (9). Since x generally contains n complex parameters,
the submatrices X1Ho and Ho in positions A and C of (8) contain a total of
2n - 1 complex, or 4n - 2 real parameters. With the parameter w 0 contained
in q, this already yields the total of 4n - 1 parameters, and there are no free
parameters available for the submatrices Band D of (8). Although there are
several ways of choosing X2, or restricting the freedom in X 1 , to comply
with the requirement of the total number of parameters, the simplest solution
is to take X2 = -Xi, which reduces (8) to
qxx ] ( 11)
In -jqhx
where the conjugate transpose x = hX1 of (10), resulting from the hermitian
character of X1, was used. Matrix ( 11) contains no parameters other than the
4n - 1 ones mentioned and is thus a canonic choice for arbitrary x, hence
arbitrary X1. The simplest solution of (5) is, then, X1 = Xo and (10) becomes
x=Xoh ( 12)
The realization of the chain matrix ( 11) is further discussed in 12. The adopted
solution is a natural extension of the one in 5.30 for the scalar case, and makes
the network of Fig. 2 transparent at infinity. Moreover, ( 11) reduces to
(5.46) in the case of a 2-port.
8. In (4), it was necessary to compute the residue matrix Hof the inverse of
the matrix Z1(P), singular atjwo and this computation process will be dis-
cussed in general terms. Let Z(p) be a positive matrix, singular atjwo but
not identically singular. Its Taylor expansion atjw 0 is
Z=M+sL (13)
with
M= Z(jwo); s =P-Jwo; L = [dZ/dp]p~Jwo ( 14)
and det L cf 0, otherwise z- 1 would have at least a double pole atjwo, which
is forbidden for a positive matrix, or else Z would be identically singular. Let
r be the rank of M. Since Mis a (constant) positive matrix, it is of the form
M
'
=[ Maa
CMaa
( 15)
similar to (7.12), where Maa is a nonsingular principal submatrix of dimen-

sion r of M (brought into the top left-hand corner by a suitable symmetric
permutation) and where Chas dimensions r · (n - r). With
U =[ C
-In-r
] (16)
one has
( 17)
II
1,
as a consequence of (15). Near jw 0 , Z- 1 (p) is of the form, similar to (4),

Y=H/e +s
where His the residue matrix of Y atjwo and where Sis finite atjwo. Writing
YZ = 1n gives, within the first order in e,
HM=O ( 18)
HL +SM= In (19)
Using form (15) of Min (18) and partitioning H conformally with (15), one
obtains from (18) only two independent relations (where the nonsingular
factor Maa has been dropped)
Since His known to be hermitian, its form is finally
(20)
If (19) is postmultiplied by M, one obtains
HLU=U (21)
by ( 17) and, with the forms (20) and ( 16) for Hand U, (21) reduces to
(22)
which simply expresses
Hbb = (OLU)- 1
Thus (20) can be rewritten
H = U(OLU)-10 (23)
a matrix ofrank n - r. We have thus proved that if a positive matrix of dimension
n has a Taylor expansion ef the form ( 13-14) near jwo , with M ef rank r < n, the
residue ef Z-1 atjwo is (23), of rank n -r, where the columns ef U are some n -r
linear independent vectors satiif.ying MU= 0: it is indeed clear that a linear
transformation of U into UT, with T nonsingular, leaves (23) invariant. It is
easily checked that solution (23) satisfies ( 18) and (21).
9. We now apply the above theorem to the matrix called Z 1 (p) = Z(p)
- jX1 in 5, which was singular at jwo, and to which the Taylor expansion
(13) applies. With the choice X1 = X o previously adopted, M reduces to
Zo - jXo =Ro, and the equation MU= 0 reduces to Ro U = 0, that is, to

(3) in the case of rank 1 extraction. With the notation
Lo= [dZ/dP]1w 0 (24)
which does not differ from L defined in ( 14), since Z 1 and Z only differ by
the constant matrixjXo, (23) reduces to
Ho= uil(A
where
,\ = i1Lou (25)
is a strictly positive scalar, since by (3), the Taylor expansion of the positive
function i1Z1u reduces to s.\ near jwo. By comparison with (9) one has
h = ,\-l/2u (26)
Finally the vector ( 12) is nonzero, for otherwise one would have X 0 u = 0 by
(26), hence (Ro+ jXo)u = 0 by adding (3), and the matrix Z1(P) would be
singular at jwo, a case excluded in the previous discussion.
10. The above developments show that the parameters of the matrix ( 11) of
the section to be extracted are completely determined by (12), (25), and (26)
in terms of the vector u solution of (3) and of the matrices Ro, Xo, Lo occur-
ring in the Taylor expansion of the impedance matrix to be synthesized. In
particular, the matrix inversion occurring in the transformation of Z 1(p) into
(4) need not to be done explicitly.
The solution vector u of (3) is only determined within a complex scalar
factor ae14'. The multiplication of u by this factor multiplies ,\ in (25) by
a 2 ; consequently, h in (26) and x in ( 12) are multiplied by the phase factor
e14' alone, and all terms of ( 11) are invariant.
In the scalar case n = 1, u in (3) is an arbitrary scalar, and one may as
well take u = 1. By (25-26), one then has h = L 0 112 and, by (12),
x = X 0 L 0 112 • The matrix (11) then reduces to (5.46) in which ho is called
1/Lo.
11. The residual impedance matrix Z 1 to be connected at the output of the

extracted section, and on which the process must be iterated, is immediately
Z1= ~ (Z-JXo)-
. 1 - Ho.
P-Jwo
J- 1 .
+JXo (27)
an expression similar to (5.37). The same expression is obtained in terms of

chain matrix ( 11) by the matrix extension of (9.35) which is
Zt = (ZC -A)- 1 (B - ZD) (28)
The section of degree I

12. The equations (4.19) of the 2n-port of chain matrix ( 11) are
Va - Vb= jqx(fwb + jxib) (29)
ia + ib = qh(hvb +jxib) (30)

Let xo and ho be arbitrary nonzero constants, and define the scalars
ifJ = -qho(hvb + jxib) (31)
Va= -jxo ifJ/ho (32)
With these notations (29-30) are rewritten as
ia + ib + hifJ/ho = 0 (33)
Va - Vb - XVa/xo = 0 (34)
Define further the new scalars ia and VfJ by
xia/xt + ia = 0 (35)
hvb/h6 - VfJ = 0 (36)

Equations (35) and (33) are combined into
0
(37)
h/ho
whereas Eqs. (36) and (34) are combined into
-1 0
h/ht]~~;~ (38)
0 -In Va =0
Vb
The current-constraint matrix M of (37) and the voltage-constraint matrix K
of (38) satisfy KM= 0, which is the extension of ( 1.22) to complex trans-
formers. Consequently, (37-38) define a transformer (2n + 2)-port with n
ports of subscripts a and b and two additional ports of subscripts ct and f3. This
(2n + 2)-port closed on a suitable 2-port (ct, {3) is equivalent to the original
2n-port of equations (29-30) to be realized, if the elimination of the variables
at ports ct, f3 between (37-38) and the equations defining the 2-port (ct, {3)
yields (29-30), and it remains to find the appropriate 2-port equations.
Clearly (32) is one of its equations. On the other hand, (36) gives
(39)
The section of degree I 311
whereas (33) premultiplied by x gives, after the replacement of xia by -xtia.

resulting from (35),
(40)
and fvb and xib are eliminated between (31), (39), and (40), to yield the
second 2-port equation
i/3 = -qho(h6vf1 +jx6ia. - jxhi/3/ ho) (41)
Finally, the signs of ia. and i/3 have to be changed in the 2-port equations (32)
and (41) since these currents were defined as entering the transformer
(Zn+ 2)-port. With the notation
[=xh =hX0 h (42)
defining a real scalar since Xo was hermitian in ( 12), the modified equations,
solved for the voltage variables, are
jxo/ho ] [ia.] (43)

(I/q -j[)/hoh6 i/3
13. With 1/ q = p - jw 0 , as defined after (8), and with the notations
I/hoh6 =L; xo/ho = X +jR (44)

the impedance matrix of (43) becomes
jX-R ] (45)
L(p - jwo - j[)
and is realized as Fig. 3.
+
On the other hand, the transformer (2n 2)-port of current-constraint
matrix defined by (37) is immediately realized by Fig. 4, one of the
-jX
Fm. 10.3
312 I 0. Synthesis of passive n-ports
sub-matrices 1n having its windings replaced by parallel connections to the

corresponding windings of the other identical submatrix. No choice of
particular values for the arbitrary parameters x0 and ho is suggested by
(44~45), whereas two more windings may be reduced to unity in Fig. 4 by
adopting for ho(xo) the value of some nonzero entry of the vector h(x), and
this saves one core which can be replaced by a parallel connection as done
a 1a 2a na
xi
I
i
11
1
II II I x•0 II
i,I a' ~
1b
~
I'
1
II
2b
II I 1
I II
1'1'
ab n'n
a b·
FIG, 10.4
in Fig. 5 where we assumed h1 -=I- 0. Finally, a more symmetric schematic is

obtained by changing the signs of all turns hi/ ho (i = 2, ... , n) and permuting
the terminal fJ' with 1~ li.
The section of degree I 313
We have thus proved that the 2n-port section ,if degree one, of chain matrix
( 11), is realized as the (2n + 2)-port ef Fig. 5 closed on the 2-port of Fig. 3.
14. In the case n = I, equation (42) with the values of 10 gives l = Xo/ Lo.
The vectors x and h reduce to scalars, and if one chooses xo and ho so as to
make these scalars equal to unity, the matrix of (37) reduces to [12, T] with
(46)
whereas (44) with the values of 10 gives L =Lo, X = Xo, R = 0. The im-
pedance matrix of the total 2-port is (45) transformed by T' · · · T and
coincides with (5.45) if Lo is replaced by 1/ho,
la 2a 3a
a
,} I II II
a' 2b 3b
1b,~
1a16
1
II
h3
ho I II
1
I
I 'I
I I
'
l ! !
~· 2'2'
ab 3'3'
ab
Fm. 10.5
Real n-ports
15. As in the scalar case of 5.28, the extraction of the complex lossless section
at jwo will be followed by the similar extraction at the conjugate point,
without a second resistance reduction, and we will show that both sections
can be combined into a single real section of degree 2 if the original matrix is
real. Before discussing this we must, however, dispose of the cases w 0 = 0 or
wo = oo, where no conjugate extractions are needed. We only discuss the case
wo = 0, for the other one is similar (change pinto 1/p).
Since, for a real matrix Z(p), Zo = Z(0) is real, so are the hermitian and
skew-hermitian parts Ro and Qo; Ro is thus real symmetric and Xo skew and
imaginary. Equation (3) then admits a real solution u, and his real in (26). On
the other hand, hXoh vanishes for all h since Xo is skew, and one has g = 0
in (42). Finally (12) defines an imaginary vector x. By taking ho real and
xo imaginary, which is compatible with the conventions of 13, all turns ratios
become real in Fig. 5. Since xo/ho is imaginary, one has also X = 0 in (44).
Since the 2-port of Fig. 3 is also real when wo, X, and g vanish, the whole
extracted section is real. Note also that the process is not actually needed in
that case, for the impedance matrix Z(p) - Qo is positive real with Z(p) and
the subtraction of Qo corresponds to an extraction of gyrators. The resulting
matrix is then singular at p = 0 and a term Ho/P can be extracted from its
inverse, with Ho real symmetric.
16. We now proceed with the conjugate extraction in the case wo =fa 0. At
p = -jwo + s, Zin (27) is the conjugate of its value Zo + sLo at p = jwo + B
(for B real) and is, therefore, RJ - jX0* + sLJ (note that Ro and Xo are
hermitian but generally not real in the case of a nonreciprocal n-port). With
the notation
(47)
defining a real symmetric matrix, with
T=RJ-2jXr (48)
and with the expansion to the first order in B
(p - jwo)-1 = (s -2jwo)- 1 ~ -l/2jwo + s/4w6 (49)

(27) becomes
Z1= [(T+sLJ)- 1 +Ho/2jwo -sHo/4w6J-l +jXo (50)
One has, within the first order in B
(T + sLJ)-l = T-l(ln + sLJ T-1)-1 = T-1(1 n - sLJ T-l) (51)

Real n-ports 315
hence
Z1 =[In+ THo/2jwo - s(LtT- 1 + THo/4w6)J- 1 T + jXo (52)
An expansion similar to (51) on the inverse matrix occurring in (52) trans-
forms this expression into
Z1= Za +eLa
with
Za =(In+ THo/2jwo)- 1 T + jXo (53)
La= On+ TH0 /2jWo)- 1 (Ltr- 1 + TH0 /4w6)(ln + TH0 /2jWo)- 1 T (54)
In the above calculations we have freely inverted the matrices T and
In + THo/2jwo. The case where one of these matrices is singular will be
discussed in 30--31.
17. The hermitian part of (53) is Ra with

2Ra= On+ THo/2jwo)- 1 (T+'f)On -Ho/1'2jwo)- 1 (55)
Since R 0 is hermitian and X, real symmetric in (48), one has T + 1' = 2Rt.
Since the conjugate of (3) is Rtu* = 0, Eq. (55) gives Ra ua = 0 if ua is taken as
Ua = (1n - Ho 'l'j2jwo)u* (56)
This shows that Ra is singular, so that no second resistance extraction is
needed. On the other hand, the expression similar to (25) is
(57)
By the substitution
On+ THo/2jwo)- 1 T= T(ln +Ho T/2jwo)-1 (58)
in (54), and the replacement of Ua by (56), one obtains on the right of (57)
the factors
(In +Ho T/2jwo)- 1 (ln -Ho'l'/2jwo)u* (59)
By adding and subtracting HT/2jwo inside the second pair of parentheses,
this expression becomes
[In - On +HoT/2jwo)- 1Ho(T +1')/2jwo]u* (60)
and reduces to u* since ( T + 'l')u* = 2Rtu* = 0. This simplifies (57) into
,\ = u'(Lt + TH T/4w6)u*
0 (61)
By (25-26) and their conjugates, where ,\ is real positive, and by (9), the
expression further reduces to
(62)
But Th* is R"'tih* -2jX,h* by (48) and R"'tih* is proportional to R"'ti u* by Eq.
(26) and therefore vanishes. If one defines the scalar
(63)
the above simplification, and the similar one on h' T, reduces (62) to
Aa =A(l -'YJ'YJ*). Since Aa is known a priori to be positive real, one has
hi :s:: 1 (64)
Finally, with
t= (1 -'Y/'Y/*)-1/2 (65)
defining a positive scalar, one has
Aa =,\/t2 (66)
If one defines ha as ,\-1l 2ua by analogy with (26), (56) simplifies successively
into
ha= t(l n - hhT/2jwo)h* = t(h* -'YJ*h) (67)
We still need to compute the analogue of (12), that is, Xa = Xaha =
.\;; 112 Xaua.
Since Raua vanishes, one also has jxa=t,\- 112 Zaua. By (53)
transformed by (58) and (56), one obtains an expression containing (59), thus
equivalent to (60) and reducing to u*. This gives
jxa = t,\- 1l 2 [Tu* +jXo(ln -Ho1'/2jwo)u*]
= t[ Th* + jXo h* - Xo hh Th* /2wo]
By the same simplifications as the ones following (62), one finally obtains
Xa = -t(x* + 'YJ*x) (68)
18. By ( 12), one has h' x = h' Xo h. By adding the transpose of this scalar
+
expression, one obtains 2h'x = h'(Xo X~)h. Since X~ = X"'ti for X 0
hermitian, one obtains h'x = h'Xrh by (47), hence, by (63),
h'x='Y]wo (69)
In contrast with (11) and (12), the parameter 'Y/ defined by (69) is not
invariant with respect to the arbitrary phase factor ejc/' of h and x mentioned in
10, but is multiplied by e2 jc/'. Consequently, it is possible to choose <p so as to
make 'YJ real. This simplifies considerably the further computations, and we
thus assume 'Y/ real in the following. The extreme cases 'Y/ = ± 1 are discussed
in 31.
19. If one denotes by subscripts r and i the real and imaginary parts of all
vectors, the relations (67-68) give
Xar = -t(l +'YJ)xr;
(70)
Real n-ports 317
If one defines the (n · 2)-matrices

H=[hr,ht]; X=[-xt,Xr] (71)
and the analogue matrices Ha and Xa, (70) can be rewritten
Ha=HA; Xa=XA (72)
where A is a diagonal matrix of dimension 2:
A = t diag {( I - 'Y/), -( I + 7J)} (73)
Separating the real and imaginary parts in (42) where f is real, and in the
conjugate transpose xh* = wo'Y) of (69), one obtains
hence
(74)
In the matrix notations of (71), the relations (74) are combined into
(75)
20. Chain matrix ( 11) can be rewritten as
(76)
By (71), one has
h = [hr, ht]G] = H[}]

(77)
jx =[-xi, xr] [} J = x[} J
With the abbreviations
G' = [H', X'] (78)
both relations (77) are combined into

and their conjugate transposes into

[h,-jx] = [I, -j]G'
Finally, (76) becomes
l2n +qFBG' (79)
with
-n (80)
21. The chain matrix of the second extracted section is deduced from (79)
by replacing X, H, and q = (p - jwo)-1 by Xa, Ha, and q* = (p +jwo)-1 ,
respectively. By (72), it is therefore
l2n + q*FCG' (81)
where
C=ABA (82)
By (73), (80), and (65) with T/ real, one computes (82) as
C= [ ~/n
-J ~] (83)
with
n = (I +TJ)f(I -TJ) (84)
22. The chain matrix of the over-all section of degree 2 is the product of (79)
and (81), thus
hn +qq*F[(p +jwo)B + (p -jwo)C +BG'FC]G' (85)
By (78) and (75),
G'F=H'X +X'H= T+ T' = [~o'f/ ~OT/] (86)
The bracketed expression in (85) is easily evaluated by (80), (82), and (86),
and various simplifications occur owing to (84). The resulting chain matrix is
hn+FKG' (87)
with
p
2 [ I +TJ (88)
K= 2 2
p +wo -wo
I +TJ
and is obviously real.
Sections of degree 2 319
23. By (78), Eqs. (4.19) deduced from chain matrix (87) are
Va - Vb= XK(H'vb - X'ib) (89)
ia + ib = HK(H'vb -X'ib) (90)
The following developments are similar to 12 except that the nonzero scalars
x0 , ho are replaced by nonsingular matrices of dimensions 2, X 0 and Ho,
temporarily arbitrary. Set
ip= -HoK(H'vb-X'ib) (91)
v"' = -X0 H 0 \ 3 (92)
Equations (89-90) become
ia + ib +HHo 1i/J = 0 (93)
Va -vb -XXo 1V(X=0 (94)
Next define i!X and vp by
x~- 1 X'ia + i<X = 0 (95)
H~- 1H'vb - vfl = 0 (96)
Equations (93) and (95) are combined into
(97)
defining the current constraints of a real transformer (2n + 4)-port, and

Eqs. (94) and (96) define the orthogonal voltage constraints. From (96) one
deduces
(98)
From (93) premultiplied by X', eliminating ia by X'ia = -X6 i"' deduced
from (95), one deduces
X'ib = -X'HH0 1 ifl +X6ia (99)
By substituting (98) and (99) into (91), one obtains, using (75),
i/J = -H0 K(H6 v/J + TH0 1i/J - X6 i,x) (100)
or, equivalently,
(101)
The 2n-port section of degree 2 is thus realized as the transformer (2n + 4)-
port of current-constraint matrix (97) closed on a 4-port whose equations are
(92) and (101) with the signs of ia: and i/3 changed. With
M=XoHol (102)
N=Ho1 (103)
Z=K- 1 +T (104)
these equations define the impedance matrix of the 4-port as
(105)
24, From (88) one deduces
(106)
By (106) and (75), the even and odd parts of (104) are obtained as
Ze =
I[ 0
2 wo +[
-(w; +[)] (107)
z = ~[p(l +77) (108)

0 2 0 p(l ~77)]
The even part of (105) contains the submatrix
(109)
'I with
I
it
fJ = ½(wo +[) <let N = (wo +[)/2 <let Ho (110)
by (107) and (103). The even part of (105) is thus
0
0
(111)
and can be realized as a transformed 8-port closed on two gyrators. The

parameters of the realization are given by (A.57-58), but a preliminary
permutation must be applied to ( 111) in order to produce a nonzero entry
in position 12. If ports 2 and 3 are permuted, (A.57-58) are applicable,
assuming mu =I- 0, and give
T= [l; ~2]; Q= - ~11 [;21 !1J ( 112)
01 = mu; 02 = det M/mn (113)

Note that the adopted permutation has produced q21
= 0 in (112), thus
saving one parameter, which is not the case for all permutations. Finally, the
4-port whose impedance matrix is the even part of (105) is the part enclosed
by dotted lines in Fig. 6.
,-
I
a.,
--
1
f31
3
a.2
2
~2
4-7
I
I
1
II II I q12
I
I I
I
I
I I I
I
3'
• I
I 6
I
L_ 2' 2 4' _J
II
Fm. 10.6
The odd part of (105) reduces to a 2-port of impedance matrix N' Z0 N to

be connected in series with ports 3 and 4 of Fig. 6. By (64), (108) is a positive
definite inductance matrix, and so is N 'Z0 N, which can be realized as
Fig. 1.21. The combined 4-port of impedance matrix (105) is thus Fig. 6. The
element values of the odd part are computed by ( 1.37-40) and are
A1 = [(l +7J)ni1 + (1 -7J)n~1]/2 ( 114)
A _ (1 -7) 2 ) (det N)2/2

2 - (1 +7J)ni1 + (1 -7J)n~ 1 ( 115)
(1 +7J)n11n12 + (1 -7J)n21n22
( 116)
u= (I +7J)ni 1 +(l -7J)n:1
25. The current-constraint matrix of (97) is of the form
0 A'
( 11 7)
B In
where both A and B are (n · 2)-matrices, and where we have introduced the
abbreviations
B=HH0 1 (I 18)
and the corresponding (2n + 4)-port is shown in Fig. 7. Finally, the real
section of degree 2 is realized by terminating the (2n + 4 )-port of Fig. 7 on the 4-port of
Fig. 6 at the ports oc1oc2 and /31/32. The realization still depends on the arbi-
trary nonsingular submatrices Xo and Ho of dimension 2, and these will now
be chosen in such a way as to reduce the number of parameters to the number
corresponding to (8.101), which is 2n per unit of degree, hence 4n for a section
of degree 2. Since one parameter is the resistance extracted initially in 3, it
remains 4n - I parameters for the lossless section. Being of degree 2, the
section contains 2 reactances, and it should remain a total of 4n - 3 constant
elements.
26. If X and H have both rank 2, the arbitrary matrices Xo and Ho can be
chosen to reduce some submatrix of dimension 2 of A and B to l 2. Each
matrix A and B contains, then, 2(n - 2) parameters. The 4-port of Fig. 6
contains 6 constant elements (4 ratios and 2 gyrators). This gives a total of
4(n - 2) + 6 = 4n - 2 elements in the realization, in excess by one over the
required figure. One additional ratio can be reduced to unity by an im-
pedance transformation on port /32, in Figs. 6 and 7 simultaneously; since this
I affects column I of B, the reduction to I 2 of some submatrix of B should be
I 1
3a
I II 1
I I,
I I 1
I I I
I I I
I I I
i
1'1'
! !
~2t> ~36
ab
Fm. 10.7
324 10. Synthesis of passive n-ports
postponed. The transformation divides by q12 all entries of column 1 of B,

thus replacing the second equation (118) by
( 119)
where
(120)
In Fig. 6, the same transformation changes the turns q12 , q22 , u into 1,
q22/q12, u/q12, respectively, and the element values 82 and A2 into 82/q12 and
A 2 /q~ 2 , respectively. Let Ha be some nonsingular submatrix of dimension 2
of H. The corresponding submatrix of B is reduced to 12 by
l2=HaH0 1 ~ - l ( 121)
resulting from ( 119). By (102), H 0 1 is x0- 1Mand ( 12 l) becomes
XoH;;1 =M~-1 (122)
The first member U of ( 122) is known, for X 0 has been determined by the
reduction of a submatrix of A to l 2. The second member of ( 122) is computed
by (120) and (122), and (122) becomes
These equations determine M by
mu= uu; m21 = u21; m12 = -u12f]/u11; m22 = -u22f]/u11 (123)

Finally, Ho is deduced from Mand Xo by (102). This completes the iterative
synthesis of a real n-port in the general case, and we have thus proved that
any positive real matrix cif dimension n and degree m is realizable as the impedance
matrix of a real passive n-port containing m reactive elements and a total number of
elements not exceeding (8.10 l).
27. Various simplifications occur (but are not indispensable) when X or Hor
both matrices have rank 1. We first discuss here the case where X alone has
rank 1, for the case where H alone has rank 1 is similar. In the next paragraph
we treat the case of simultaneous degeneracy in X and H, which occurs in
reciprocal n-ports.
If Xhas rank l in (71 ), the vectors Xr and Xi are proportional, so that the
entries of the complex vector x have all the same phase. One may then choose
the phase of u in (3) to make x real. With Xi= 0, Eq. (74) gives
(124)
so that 71 is real, and our normalization is coherent with the one of 18. The
first column vector of X vanishes, and so does the first column of A in ( 118)
if Xo is chosen diagonal. In Fig. 7 all windings in parallel with port oi:1 reduce
to zero turns, and this leaves port oi:1 open in Fig. 6. The first row and column
of the impedance matrix (105) become irrelevant, and the 4-port reduces to a
3-port of impedance matrix
[-~ m' ]
N'ZN
where m' denotes the second row-vector of M. The odd part of (125) is not
(125)
altered with respect to ( I 05), whereas the even part is a constant skew
matrix of dimension 3, hence realizable with ideal transformers and only one
gyrator.
28. If the original impedance matrix Z(p) from which the section of degree
2 has been extracted was symmetric, Ro and Xo are real symmetric, and (3)
accepts a real solution vector u. Consequently, h and x in (26) and (12) are
real. In addition to the simplification produced in 27, the second row-vector
of H vanishes, and so does the second row vector of B in ( 118) if Ho is chosen
diagonal. This short-circuits port {32 in Figs. 7 and 6. The transformer
(2n + 4)-port then reduces to the transformer (2n + 2)-port of Fig. 4 with all
real ratios. On the other hand, Mand Nin (102-103) are diagonal with
Ho and Xo. Writing m2 for m22 and N = n1 n2, matrix (125) becomes+
o o
n12 Z 11
!: m2 ]
[-------------------------·--·--··-··-·:-·-----·
0 i n1n2 Z12
2 ·--·--·-
(126)
-m2 n1n2 Z21 i n2 Z22
where the last port must still be shorted. As a particular case of (4 .28a) with
the partition indicated in ( 126), the impedance matrix of the final 2-port is
computed as
[~
[ m~/n~ Z22 -m2 n1 Z21/n2 Z22 ]
(127)
= -m2 n1 Z12/n2 Z22 nr Zn - nr Z12 Z21/ Z22
In (127), we replace the entries of the matrix Z = Z0 Ze by their values +
(107-108) where ~ is (124). The remaining parameters in (127) are only n1
and the combination m2/n2. In accordance with (102-103), l/n1 is the entry
11 of Ho whereas m2/n2 is the entry 22 of Xo, so that only two arbitrary
scalars remain. By analogy with 12, we thus set
(128)
Finally, (127) reduces to

n2/Cp n/Cp ]
[ (129)
n/Cp Lp + 1/Cp
with
n = -2xoho/Wo(l +ri)
(130)
and corresponds to the 2-port of Fig. 8 where Land Care positive by (64).
ao-----.
cio---.... .____------op'
Fm. 10.8
As in 13, one may assume h1 # 0, for h has at least one nonzero entry and
chose ho= hu which reduces Fig. 4 to Fig. 5. Therefore, the reciprocal 2n-port
section is Fig. 5, where the 2-port (oi, (3) is Fig. 8. All ratios in Fig. 5 are real; xo is
still arbitrary and can be chosen to reduce one additional ratio to unity. The
total number of ratios in Fig. 5 is then 2(n - 1) to which one must add the
three elements of Fig. 8 and the initially extracted resistance. This makes a
total of 2n + 2 elements for a section of degree 2, hence n + I elements per
unit of degree, in accordance with (8.102). We have thus proved that any
symmetric positive real matrix of dimension n and degree m is realizable as the im-
I pedance matrix of a real passive reciprocal n-port containing m reactive elements and a
I total number of elements not exceeding (8.102).
,·,I For further reference, we compute the chain matrix of the reciprocal
1.
f:' 2n-port section by (87-88) where the matrices (78) reduce to
i
!I F=[o
h,
x,];
0
G' =[h;
0
o,]
x,
'Ii
I I for Xi = hi = 0. Omitting the subscripts r, one obtains
12n+
21~w~:h'
P2 + wo phh'
2
t=~i
wo hx'
( 131)
1+77 l-77
j
I
I
l__
29. In the scalar case n = 1, which is necessarily reciprocal, the (2n + 2)-port
of Fig. 5 becomes a 4-port of ratio matrix (46), as in 14. The over-all
impedance matrix is (129) transformed by (46) which becomes
[Lp +m2/Cp Lp +m/Cp] (132)

Lp +m/Cp Lp + 1/Cp
with m = n + 1. Except for notation, the matrix ( 132) is the impedance
matrix (5.48) of the Brune section of Fig. 5.14, and it is easily checked that
the element values are identical. Also the inequality (64) reduces to (5.41).
30. It remains to discuss the singular cases mentioned at the end of 16, and
we start with the case where Tis singular. Actually T- 1 disappears from (54)
if the last two matrices are replaced by (58), and the results (53-54) are thus
meaningful even for T singular, and their validity can be established without
assuming the intermediate existence of T- 1 . Moreover, the process of 16 is
not needed in that case, as will now be shown. A vector v =I=- 0 then exists,
such that Tv = 0, that is, (Rt - 2JXr )v = 0 by (48). Since Tis a positive
matrix, one also has fJT = 0 by theorem 7.10, hence 1'v = 0, or
(R* + 2jXr)v = 9. Combining this with the previous result, one obtains
By comparison with the conjugate of (3), one may choose u = v*. Since Xr is
real, one then has Xru = 0, hence
(133)
With Xo = Xr + JXi where Xi is real skew, one has Zo = Ro + jX0 =
R0 - Xi + JXr, and ( 133) shows that the real matrix Z + Xi is singular at
jwo, hence also at - Jwo. Consequently, the synthesis reduces to the extrac-
tion of a real reactance from the real impedance Z +Xi, itself deduced from
Z by the extraction of a real gyrator network.
31. The other difficulty mentioned in 16 occurs when 1n + TH0 /2jw 0 is

singular, so that (53-54) do not hold. One then has
v + THo v/2Jwo = 0 (134)
for some vector v =I=- 0. By (9), Ho v contains hv = 0 which is nonzero if v =I=- 0
in (134), and h(l34)/0 gives
hTh= -2jwo (135)
Owing to (48), (135) and its conjugate transpose give
(136)
328 10. Synthesis of passive n-ports
Since Rt is passive, the first condition ( 136) requires Rth = 0, hence Roh* = 0.
By comparison with (3), which is equivalent to Roh= 0 by (25), one also
has Ro(h ± h*) = 0. Since one at least of the vectors h =j= h* is nonzero for
h =p 0, h can be replaced by h ± h* as a solution of (3), and this vector is real
or imaginary.
For h real, the second condition (136) compared to (63) gives 1/ = 1.
Moreover, (42) then reduces to g = h' Xo h = h' Xr h, since jh' Xi h = 0 for Xi
skew and h real, so that one has
t=wo ( 137)
by (136). For h imaginary, a similar analysis gives 1/ = -1 and (137). In
either case i = hZh is a positive real function, and (13-14) give
iuwo + s) =hRoh + jhXoh +shLoh =Jt + 8 (138)
since hL 0 h = 1, owing to (25-26). The inequality (5.41) thus requires

lwol > g and the limiting case ( 137) can only be obtained if i is a resistance in
series with an inductance or a capacitance, as proved in 9.10. The matrix Z
has then a pole at zero or infinity which can be extracted, and the synthesis of
16 is not needed. In any case, the element values in (107-108), (114-116),
and the transformer ratios remain finite for 1/ = ± 1 so that the general
synthesis is valid. The inductance A 2 vanishes, however, in (115) and the
degree reduction is thus only of one unit.
'/
,I
L
chapter 11
Factorization of scattering matrices'
Factorization theorems
l. The product S = S1S2 of two bounded (real, para-unitary) matrices is bounded (real
para-unitary). Since 1n -.S\S1 and 1n - S2S2 are positive definite in Rep> 0,
so are both terms of
This is the matrix extension of the scalar theorem 7.49, and its network
interpretation is similar to the one of Fig. 7.17: to produce the n-port of
scattering matrix S (normalized to n separate positive resistances) from two
n-ports of matrices S1 and S2, it is sufficient to combine separately each port
of S1 with the corresponding port of S2 by a circulator, thus forming the
corresponding port of S. Note that S is generally not symmetric, even if
S1 and S2 are, and this is associated with the presence of gyrators in the
realization.
2. The most general bounded para-unitary matrix of degree 1 is ,if the form
S = ( 1 - 2ao Bui1) (1)

n P+Pt
with a 0 = Re Po > 0, u an n-vector such that flu = 1, and B = S ( oo) a unitary
constant matrix. Since det Sis a bounded para-unitary function of degree 1, by
8.20, it is of the form (6.37), and the common denominator of the entries of
Sis p +Pt- Since S(p) is finite at infinity, its numerator (p +P"t)S(p) is a
+
matrix of polynomials of degree 1 which can bewrittenB[(p Pt) 1n - 2aoA]
329
i
I j
330 11. Factorization of scattering matrices
with A and B constant. Since B = S( oo) is unitary, 1n - 2<Xo A/(p + Pri) must
be para-unitary, which requires
A(p -<Xo -iwo) +A( -p - IXO +imo) + 2<XoAA = 0
The cancellation of the coefficient ofp forces A to be hermitian and the condi-
tion then reduces to A 2 = A. Moreover, since ( 1) must be of degree 1, then A
must have rank 1, hence be of the form kufi, where k is a real constant and u a
constant vector which may be normalized by
fiu = 1 (2)
Finally, the condition A 2 = A requires k = 1, and the form (1) is established.
3, A bounded matrix S sati.ifying

S(Po)u = 0 (3)
at a point Po in Re Po > 0 can be factored into S = S1S2 where S2 is ( 1) and where S1
is bounded. Since one can incorporate the arbitrary matrix factor B in S2 and
the inverse matrix B- 1 in S, one may as well assume B = In. It is thus
sufficient to prove that S1 is bounded with S. Since
S2 = 1n - 2<X 0 ufi/(p + p?;) (4)
is para-unitary, one has
(5)
On the imaginary axis, 1n - S1S1 is positive definite with 1n - SS since S2 is
unitary, and
By virtue of theorem 7.23, it remains to prove that S1 is hurwitzian. By (5),

where Sis hurwitzian, it is sufficient to prove that S1 is analytic at Po. Since S
is analytic at po, its Taylor expansion near po isoftheformP +(P - Po)Q + ···
where P = S(Po) satisfies (3), that is, Pu= 0. Because of this condition, the
coefficient of the only term in (p - Po)-1 of (5) vanishes, and S1 is analytic
at Po-
I 4. For a bounded para-unitary matrix, the factorization of the last theorem gives
11
1, S1 para-unitary and deg S1 = deg S - 1. Due to (3), det S vanishes at Po. Since
det S2 is (6.37) and since det S = det S1 det S2, the factorization of S corre-
sponds to the similar scalar factorization of det S in accordance with 6.20.
Since deg S = deg det S for para-unitary matrices, and deg S2 = 1, the degree
reduction is also proved. As a consequence, every bounded para-unitary matrix
is factorable into bounded para-unitary matrices of degree 1.
: i l
Factorization theorems 331
5. If S(p) is a real matrix, (3) accepts a real solution vector u at a real zero
o:o of det S, and (2) becomes
u'u = 1 (6)
The extracted factor
2aouu'
S2=ln--- (7)
p oco +
is then real also. In order to obtain a factorization theorem for real bounded para-
unitary matrices in terms of real matrices of degree 1 and 2, one must combine two
conjugate extractions at two conjugate zeros Po and Pri of det S. The analogue
of (4) at Pri is
(8)
with some vector ua, and one will have S1 = S4 Sa, hence S = S1S2 = S4 Sa S2 =
S4 Sa with Sa = Sa S2, thus
(9)
The vector Ua must be determined by the condition

(10)
similar to (3), and it must be proved that the resulting matrix (9) is real. But
the conjugate of (3) is S(pt)u* = 0, and replacing S by S1S2 with S2 given by
(4), one obtains
sl (Pt) (ln - 0:o uu/pt)u* = 0
which shows, by comparison with (10), that
ua = (ln -a0 uu/Pt)u* ( 11)

is a solution, after normalization by ii.a ua = 1. With the notation
( 12)
and its conjugate, ( 11) becomes Ua = u* - YJ*u, and one obtains ua ua =
1 -7J7J* by (2), (11), (12), and their transposes. This shows that one must
normalize ( 11) to become
Ua = t(u* -7J*U) ( 13)
where tis defined by (10.65), and (13) is similar to (10.67).
We now prove that one has Ua =I= 0 ifPo is complex, that is, if wo =I= 0. The
value Ua = u* - 7J*u before normalization vanishes for u* = YJ*u, hence after
premultiplication by u and use of (2), for uu* = YJ*. But uu* is YJ*Pri /oco by the
conjugate of ( 12), and the condition reduces to Pri = o:o, hence w 0 = 0. As a
result, one has t =I= 0 in ( 13) for wo =I= 0, hence I1/ I < I in ( 12) since ila ua is
nonnegative. On the other hand, one only has the weaker inequality hi ::;: I
on the real axis, as in ( I 0.64), since ( 12) then reduces to 'Y/ = u' u, and this
gives 'Y/ = I by (2) if u is real, which is the case for a real matrix.
The combined matrix (9) of degree 2 is
M
S =l
a n
+(p-+-ao)2
-- -
+ w~ ( 14)
with
M = -2a0 (P + a 0 ) (ua i1a + ui1) + 2ajw0(uai1a - ui1) + 4a~ uai1a ui1 (15)
As a solution of (3), u contains an arbitrary factor aeN, but the modulus a is

determined by (2), whereas the phase factor remains arbitrary. As in 10.18. it
is convenient to further normalize u in order to make 'Y/ real in (12). With this
assumption, ( 15) simplifies to
M = - 2ao(P + ao)t2(u*u' + ui1 -TJuu' -TJu*i1)
( 16)
+ 2aoJwo t2(u*u' - ui1 + TJU*i1 - 'Y/uu')
owing to (13) and (10.65), and every successive pair of terms of (16) is real.
6. In 3, we have considered the factorization of a bounded matrix S into

S1S2, where S2 is (4), and established that S1 was bounded provided u
satisfied (3). We now want to discover under what conditions one has
deg S1 < deg S2. For S para-unitary, this was an automatic consequence of
(3), but we now consider a general bounded matrix.
Imagine that Sis expanded into its unipolar components in (5). Since
+
Po is not a pole of S, In 2ao ui1/ (p - Po) is finite at every pole Pi of S and
takes some finite value Hi. Every unipolar component of S1 is the correspond-
ing unipolar component of S multiplied by Hi, and one certainly has
deg S1 < deg S. A decrease of degree in some unipolar component is only
+
possible if Hi is singular at some pole Pi of S. But <let [In 2ao ui1/ (p - Po)] =
(p + P't) (p - p0 ) only vanishes at p = -P't, and this point must coincide with
some pole A of S, which means S( -P't) = oo or §(Po)= oo, a necessary (but
generally not sufficient) condition for the decrease of degree.
7. The para-conjugate transpose of (5) is
and reduces to
(17)
it,
Factorization theorems 333
at Po. If Tis the McMillan residue matrix of~ at Po, as defined in 8.22, the
McMillan residue of ( 17) at Po is ( 1n - u/1) T, and one has deg S 1 < deg S at
Po iff ~ ~
rank ( 1n - uil) T < rank T
This means that a vector x i= 0 must exist such that one has simultaneously
(In -uil) Tx = 0 ( 18)
Tx i=O (19)
Since the general solution of (In - uil)y = 0 is y = 11u where II is an arbitrary
nonzero scalar, ( 18) requires
Tx=u (20)
for some xi= 0, and (19) is automatically satisfied since u was assumed non-
zero in (3). Using the definition of Tin 8.22, where P 0 and Qo are non-
singular, one can rewrite (20) as
(~ +0n_t)Qox = polU
which merely expresses that the last n - t components of P0 1u vanish. This is
equivalently expressed by
(2 I)
and the necessary and sufficient condition for degree reduction is that a vector u i= 0
exists satisfying (3) and (2 I).
8. The above condition can equivalently be expressed as

rank ST< rank T (22)
where S denotes S(po), This is because (22) expresses that a vector xi= 0
exists such that one has STx = 0 with Tx i= 0. With the notation (20), this
gives (3).
9. The rank t of Tis the span of~ at Po, whereas, S being regular at Po, the
rank of ST is the span of SS at Po, assuming that if SS is regular at p0 its span
is counted as zero. The ;;ecessary and sufficient condition for degree reduction is
thus also
span S~ <span~ at Po (23)

In particular, (23) is automatically satisfied for a para-unitary matrix since
S~ = In is regular, hence of zero span, provided ~ = S - l has a pole at p0 ,
which simply means det S(po) = 0, as already obtained in 4.
10. JJ S(p 0 ) = 0, the necessary and sufficient condition for degree reduction is that
f
Po be a pole ef This is easily deduced from (23), since every entry of S(p)
contains p - Po as a factor, so a cancellation must occur in S§,. This is also
obvious from theorem 7, for (3) is satisfied for any u, whereas system (21) has
rank n - I at most, since t > I.
11. Even in the assumption of the last theorem, the determination of the
vector u, necessary for the factorization, involves the fine structure of S, since
it must be deduced from (21) or (20). If, however, (In - ~)- 1 exists and is
analytic at Po, a simple explicit sufficient (but not necessary) condition on u
can be obtained. Using the notations of 8.22 and writing ~a=~+ On-t and
Ga= G + i
In-t, one has, near Po, = P 0 G; 1~a Q0 and
In-§, =PoG; 1 (GaP0 1 -~aQo)

Premultiplying by GaP0 1 and postmultiplying by (In -i)-1, one obtains
GaP0 1 = (GaP0 1 -~aQO)(In -§)-l (24)
If the vector u satisfies
(25)
at Po' (24) gives Ga Po 1u = 0, since Ga Po 1 - ~a Qo is finite, and this relation
reduces to (21) atpo, Consequently, if (In -S)- 1 is analytic at Po, (21) is a
consequence of (25). The reciprocal is not gene;ally true, for GaPo 1 - ~a Qo
may be singular at Po.
If(ln -i)-1 is not analytic atpo but has an analytic submatrix, one may
take as nonzero entries of u in (25) only the ones multiplied by the analytic
entries of (In -i)- 1 . One then proves, as above, that the corresponding
solution vector u of (25) also satisfies (21): in the transformation leading to
(24), it is sufficient to multiply both members of the preceding equation by
the nonsingular submatrix of (In -~)- 1 rather than by the matrix itself.
All-pass 2n-ports
12. A lossless (real, reciprocal) 2n-port of scattering matrix
(n)
S
0
a] (n) (26)
(n)
normalized to identical terminations of real symmetric matrix Ro at its n
input and its n output ports is called a (real, reciprocal) all-pass 2n-port. The
submatrices Sa and Sb are thus (real) para-unitary, and one has S~ = Sb in
the reciprocal case.
All-pass 2n-ports 335
The cascade connection of two (real, reciprocal) all-pass 2n-ports of identical

reference resistances is a (real, reciprocal) all-pass 2n-port. If the scattering matrices
are (26) and
(27)
and if the 2n-ports are cascaded in the mentioned order, the combined
scattering matrix, as easily deduced from the wave equations, is
(28)
(note that the factor submatrices are combined in opposite orders) and this
proves the theorem.
The factorization theorems 4 and 5, applied separately to Sa and Sb of
(26), show that every all-pass 2n-port is equivalent to a cascade of all-pass 2n-ports
(generally complex) of degree 1, and that every real all-pass 2n-port is equivalent
to a cascade of real all-pass 2n-ports of degrees 1 and 2 (generally nonreciprocal).
The elementary sections have a scattering matrix of the form
(29)
where Sis (4) for the complex section, and (7) or ( 14) for the real sections, or
the transpose of (29). The latter is realized by changing the polarity of the
gyrators occurring in the realization of (29) and need no further discussion.
13. For later use, we will realize the 2n-port of scattering matrix (29) when
normalized to the more general terminations, of impedance matrix Zo at the
output and Zo at the input. Note, however, that the resulting networks do
not form all-pass 2n-ports when cascaded, since the normalization matrices
to the left and to the right of the junction are different; thus the scattering
matrices do not combine in accordance with (28).
We first compute the chain matrix of the 2n-port having the scattering
matrix (29) normalized with respect to the terminal impedance matrix
(30)
If one denotes by Ro the hermitian part of Zo, Eq. (6.61), written in terms
of the input and output variables of subscripts a and b, respectively, becomes
-Zo
(31)
-Ri12sR0112
The chain equations are obtained by premultiplying (31) by the inverse of

the left half-submatrix, which is
as can be checked, taking into account the identity

Z 0 R0 1 20 = Z0 R0 1 Z 0 (32)
which is easily established by taking inverses and replacing Ro by its defini-
tion. Finally, the chain matrix is
14. We now particularize this result for the general (complex) all-pass of
degree I, where Sis (4) so that S- 1 is the matrix occurring in (5). One
obtains
With the notations

h = a612R-612u (35)
k= Zoh (36)
matrix (34) simplifies into
_1_ [(p -Po)]n + kh kk ] (37)
P-Po hh (P-Po)ln +hk
Note also that, with notations (35-36), the normalization condition (2)
becomes
kh +hk= 2ao (38)
15. If in the chain matrix ( I 0.11) of the complex 2n-port section of degree 1
realized in 10.13, where q was (p -Jwo)-1, one replaces x by -jk andjwo by
+
ao jw 0 , one obtains the matrix (37). Consequently, the same substitutions
in the realization (Fig. 10.5 with the 2-port afJ of Fig. I 0.3) produce the all-
pass 2n-port of degree 1. The 2-port of Fig. 10.3 involves the parameter
g = xh defined by (10.42). In accordance with the above substitutions, this
parameter takes the value g = jkh. Since the real part of kh is ao by (38),
we set
kh =ao JfJo+ (39)
and one has
g =Jao -{Jo (40)
Since g and wo only enter in (10.45) through the combinationj(wo +(),the

replacement by oi:o + jwo and (40) of jwo and (, respectively, replaces this
combination by j(wo -/30), and it is therefore equivalent to replace g by
-/3o, that is, by the real part of (40) in the result. On the other hand, with
x0 = jk 0 , the second equation ( I 0.44) becomes
ko/ho=}X-R (41)
In the case of a real all-pass section of degree (with Po= oi: 0 real)
working between real terminations (Zo real but not necessarily symmetric), u
is real, and (35-36) define hand k as real vectors. One then has (3 0 = 0 in (39)
and X = 0 in (41), so that the whole realization, including the ratios
x7 /x7 = kdk 0 , is real.
16. Before discussing the realization of the real all-pass section of degree
2, let us consider in general terms the product of the chain matrix (37) by a
similar matrix where Po, k, and hare replaced by P6, ka, and ha, respectively.
Since (37) is simply related to ( I 0.11) and since the product of two matrices
of the form (10.11) at conjugate points was computed in 10.22 and realized in
10.25, it is of interest to avoid a new computation. In Chap. 10 we considered
the combination ofa section of parameters (jwo, x, h) with a section of para-
meters (-jwo, xa, ha) related to the first parameters by (10.67-68) where TJ
was defined by (10.69) and t by (10.65). Moreover, T/ was assumed real in
10.18. By the transformations defined for the first section (x = -jk and
replacement ofjwo by oi:o + jwo), Eq. (10.69) becomes
YJ(oi:o + }wo) = h'k (42)
On the other hand, the parameters of the second sections are ha which is not
altered and Xa, to be similarly replaced by -}ka. This, and x = -jk, trans-
form (10.68) into
ka = t(k* -YJ*k) (43)
If one computes the parameter ga = ka ha playing the role of (39) for the
second section, one obtains (a= oi:o -j/30 by (43), (10.67), (42), (39), and
(10.65). Consequently, the combinationj(-wo +fa) playing for the second
section the role ofj(wo +fl for the first section is the conjugate ofj(wo +fl.
On the other hand, g only enters through the combination wo + g occurring
in (10.107) in the final element values of the section of degree 2 in Chap. 10.
Consequently, the replacement of g by -/3o works for both sections of degree
1, hence for the combined section of degree 2. Finally, the transformation
x = Xr +]Xi= -jk = -j(kr + jki) gives Xr = ki; Xi= -kr, thus replacing the
second equation ( I 0. 71) by
(44)
In conclusion, we have proved that the cascade connection of the section of chain
matrix (37), whose parameters are related by (39), (42), and (10.65) with T/ real, with
a similar section of parameters Pri, ha, ka related to h and k by ( l 0.67) and (43), is
the 2n-port of 10.25 where the second matrix ( l 0. 71) is replaced by (44) and where
f is replaced by -f3o.
17. Separating the real and imaginary parts in (39) and (42), one obtains, by
a computation similar to the one of 10.19,
k;h, = (l +TJ)a0 /2; ki hi= ( l -TJ)a0 /2
(45)
k;hi = (TJWo +{30 )/2; ki h, = (TJWo - {30 ) /2
From (44) and the first equation ( l 0. 71), one then deduces
T=X'H=~r(l +TJ)ao TJWO + f3o] (46)

2 TJWO -f3o (l -TJ)ao
replacing (10.75). By (10.104), one can finally deduce K- 1 = Z - T from
(46) and from Z=Z0 +ze given by (10.107-108) where f is -{Jo. One
obtains ( l 0.106) where p is replaced by p - ao. The same substitution will
appear in (10.88). We have thus proved that the chain matrix of the combined
section of the last theorem is defined by (10.87-88) with X replaced by (44) and p
replaced by p - ao in K. This is separately obvious, for the transformation of
p - jwo into p - Po can be considered either as a transformation of jwo into
+
ao jwo or of p into p - ao.
18. In the case of the real all-pass of degree 2 of scattering matrix ( 14), arising
from (9), operating between real symmetric terminations of matrix Ro, (36)
reduces to
k=Roh (47)
and (42) becomes
TJ = h' Ro hfPo (48)
hence coinciding with (12) owing to (35). On the other hand, one has the
relations
(49)
similar to (35-36), for the parameters of the second complex section, and the
,[ relations (10.67) and (43) then both reduce to (13). Moreover, (47) changes
(39) into kh = hRo h which is real, so that one has f3o = 0. Thus, the real all-pass
1'
\, of degree 2 is a particular case of the nonreciprocal 2n-port section of Chap. l 0.
19. In order to realize real reciprocal all-pass 2n-ports, one has to combine the
sections obtained in 15 and 18 with their transposes, having as scattering
matrices the transposes of (29). The effect of the transposition on the chain
matrix is described by the following lemma, slightly too general for our
immediate needs, but of interest for later developments. The equation of an
n-port of scattering matrix S normalized to Zt is (6.61 ), which can be written
V - Zt i -- t i (v
Rt112sR- 12 + Zt i) (50)
The equation of the n-port of scattering matrix S', referred to the same
termination, is (50) where Sis replaced by S'. If S (and S') is para-unitary, S
is s- 1 and S' is S; 1 • After premultiplication by Rlf 2S*R1- 112 , the equation of
the n-port of matrix S' normalized to Z 1 becomes
Rt1 i2S* R-
t 1 (v -
12 Zt i) -v
- + Zt i (51)
This is (50) where S and Zt are replaced by S* and - Zt, respectively,
whereas Rt is unchanged. Such a substitution is inconsistent, for Rt was
defined in (6.57) as the hermitian part of Zt, and should change into -Rt by
the substitution, but this is irrelevant for it introduces a factor j in Rf 12 and
a factor 1/j in R,: 112 which cancel in (51). Finally, the equations of a lossless
n-port of scattering matrix S ' referred to Zt are the ones of the n-port of scattering
matrix s* refe"ed to - Zt.
20, If Sis (4), S* is In + 2a0 uil/(p -Pt) and results from (4) by the (con-
sistent) substitution of -Po and -a 0 for Po and a 0 • Since the sign of Ro is
also changed, (35) is unaltered, whereas (36) is replaced by
(52)
Finally, the chain matrix of the 2n-port having as scattering matrix the transpose of
(29), where Sis (4), between the terminations (30), is (37) where Po and k are
replaced by -Po and (52), respectively.
In the case of a real all-pass section (Po= ao real and Zo = Ro real
symmetric), (36) reduces to (47) and (37) to
- _I_ [(P-ao)In +kh' kk' ]

(53)
p -ao hh' (P-ao)In +hk'
Since (52) reduces to kb= -k, the chain matrix of the transpose all-pass with
the same terminations is (53), with ao and k replaced by -ao and -k. The
product of the chain matrices is the chain matrix
_I_ [(p 2 -a~)In +2a0 kh' 2Pkk' ]
p2-a~ 2phh' (p2 -a~)In +2a0 hk' (54)
of the reciprocal 2n-port all-pass of degree 2. On the other hand, (38)
reduces to
h'k=ao (55)
21. Consider the chain matrix (10.131) where wo, h, x, and 17 are (coherently)
replaced by jao, h/JA,jk/JA, and l(A, respectively, with,\ real arbitrary. The
matrix becomes
a0 kh'
2 I+,\ lpkk'I
-,\
12n + p2 -a~ (56)
phh' a0 hk'
1 +,\ l -,\
whereas (10.69) becomes (55), and the element values (10.130) become
(57)
assuming that one has replaced xo and ho by jko/✓A and ho/✓i The modified
2n-port is passive for IAI ~ l. Matrix (56) reduces to (54) for,\= 0. Conse-
quently, the reciprocal 2n-port all-pass of degree 2 is a particular case ef the reciprocal
2n-port section ef Chap. l 0. The above substitutions are similar to the ones of
9.14 for the 2-port case.
22. The reciprocal all-pass of degree 4 is obtained by cascading the non-

reciprocal all-pass of degree 2, discussed in 18, with its transpose. By 16-17,
the chain matrix of the first all-pass, deduced from ( l 0.89-90) is
ln +XKH' XKX' ]
[ (58)
HKH' ln +HKX'
where X is (44) and where K is ( I 0.88) with p replaced by p - ao. On the
other hand, we have established /3o = 0 at the end of 18, and since the all-
pass of degree 2 was deduced in 17 by the substitution of -/3o tog from the
section of Chap. 10, it is equivalent to make g = 0 in (10.107). One may thus
equivalently define K by (10.104), that is, by
(59)
where Z0 is (10.108), where Zeis (10.107) with [ = 0, and where Tis (46)
with (3 0 = 0. Note that Z 0 and Tare symmetric and Ze skew. By (52) and
the following theorem, the second all-pass is deduced from the first by
replacing Ro and Po by -Ro and -Po, respectively. This leaves (35) and (48)
invariant, replaces k by -kin (47) and X by -X in (44). This also changes
Z0 , Ze and T (with [ = 0, /3o = 0) into Z 0 , -Ze and -T, respectively, so
that the matrix Ka (replacing K of the first section) is
(60)
Finally, the chain matrix of the second section is (58) with X and K replaced
by -Xand Ka, respectively. Owing to the relations (46), or X'H = H'X = T

(since Tis symmetric for fJ 0 = 0), the product of the chain matrices sim-
plifies to
In +X(K -Ka)H' X(K +Ka)X' ]
[
H(K +Ka)H' In +H(K -Ka)X'
and the corresponding equations are
Va - Vb= X[(K -Ka)H'vb - (K + Ka)X'ib]

(61)
ia + ib = H[(K + Ka)H'vb - (K -Ka)X'ib]
23. These equations are only slightly more complicated than (10.89-90) and
the synthesis proceeds in a similar way, so that the all-pass 2n-port section of
degree 4 is realized as Fig. 10.7 with the turn-ratios (10.118), but with a
different 4-port (oc, fJ). Relations (10.93, 94, 95, 96, and 99) with a change
of sign in ia and ip transform (61) into
va = X 0 [(K -Ka)H~ vfl + (K + Ka)(X~ ia - TH0 1 ifl)] (62)

ifl = H 0 [(K + Ka)H~ vfl + (K -Ka)(X~ ia - TH0 1 ifl)] (63)
and these are the equations of the 4-port. By Xo 1 (62) ±Hol (63), one
obtains the equivalent equations
H0 \ 3 + X 0 1 va = 2K(H~ vfl + X~ ia - TH0 1 ifl) (64)

H 0- 1 1·
fl- x-0 1 v
a- - 2Ka (H'O vf l - X'0 z·a + T'H-O 11·)fl (65)
By K-I (64) ±K; 1 (65), this system becomes
(K- 1 + K; 1 )Ho 1i/3 + (K- 1 - K; 1 )Xo 1 va = 4H~ vfl

(K- 1 -K-
a 1 )H- 1 · + (K- 1 +K- 1 )X- 1
O Z13 a O Va =4X'.
O 1a -4T'H-
1'
O zfl
By (59-60) this simplifies into
Z 0 H0 \+ (Ze - T)X0 1 va = 2H~vfl

3
(Ze + T)H0 1 ifl + Z X 0 1 va = 2X~ia

0
and defines the hybrid equations of the 4-port as
-NJ [Vrz]
Zp ip (66)
where
ya= x~-lzoXo 1 /2 (67)
zfl = H~-l ZoHo 1 /2 (68)
N = -x~- 1 (Ze + T)Ho 1 /2 (69)
and where the relation -(Ze +

T)' = Ze - Twas used. In (67) and (68),
+
Z 0 is (10.108). In (69), Ze T, as deduced from (10.107) with g = 0 and
from (46) with {Jo = 0 is
z + T= 1.[(l +ri)ao -(1 -71)wo] ( 70)

e 2 (1 +ri)wo (1 -71)ao
The hybrid matrix (66) is the sum of the hybrid matrix (3.10) of a trans-
former 4-port ofratio matrix N and of the direct sum Ya+ Zp. By (3.11 ), the
4-port (66) is realized as Fig. 1. The canonic realization of Ya as a capacitance
Zp
n12 a1
! I 1
a1
I
Ya
n21 n22 a2
,, I I 1
I
a2
~; ~2
FIG. 11.1
2-port and of Zp as an inductance 2-port then gives Fig. 2 after the suppres-
sion of one redundant winding. In conclusion, the reciprocal all-pass 2n-port of
degree 4 is realized as Fig. 10. 7 where the 4-port (a, {3) is Fig. 2.
Cascade n-port synthesis 343
Cascade n-port synthesis

24. As in 10.2, we assume that the passive n-port is specified by its matrix
Z(p) of normal rank n and such that Z + Z has also normal rank n. Consider
an arbitrary point Po= oco +jwo with oco > 0, and write (10.2) where Ro is
hermitian strictly positive. The matrix Z - jXo is positive with Z and takes
the value Ro at Po. Its scattering matrix S normalized to Ro vanishes at Po, so
(3) is satisfied by an arbitrary vector u and a factorization (at least without
degree reduction) into S = S1S2, where S2 is (4), is possible with u arbitrary.
On the other hand, the n-port rif scattering matrix S = S1S2 is realizable as a
2n-port all-pass of scattering matrix
(71)
closed on then-port of scattering matrix S1 (this immediately results from the wave
equations and is the extension of Fig. 7.17 ton-ports). We have thus been able
to extract from an arbitrary passive n-port an all-pass of scattering matrix
(71), where S 2 is (4) normalized to Ro, preceded by a constant series im-
pedance jX0 . If, in addition, one extracts the series impedance -jX0 at the
all-pass output, one obtains the structure of Fig. 3. If this structure operates
all-pass
Ro
Fm. 11.3
between Ro - jXo at the input and Ro + jXo at the output, its behavior is the
one of the all-pass alone terminated on Ro at both ends. Consequently, the
n-port of Fig. 3 is an all-pass operating between .20 = Ro - jX0 at the input,
and Z 0 =Ro+ jX0 at the output, and its scattering matrix is (71) if normal-
ized to Zo and Zo at the input and output, respectively. Since this is the
normalization adopted in (30), the chain matrix of the over-all extracted
2n-port of Fig. 3 is (37) with the notations (35, 36). Consequently, the positive
matrix Z is realized by closing on some positive matrix Z1 the 2n-port of chain matrix
(37). Note also that the scattering matrix S of Z - jX0 normalized to Ro, as
defined above is, by (6.61),
I
S = R 0 112 (Z -jX0 -R0 )(Z -jX0 +R0 )- 1R6 12
Ii (72)
!' = Rolf2(z - Zo)(Z + Zo)-1R6/2
and is identical to the scattering matrix of Z normalized to Zo (not to Zo)-
For n = 1, one obtains the results of 9.6.
·I 25. Since (72) vanishes at Po, the only condition for degree reduction in the
I
above extraction process is that Po be also a pole of§ and that u be chosen to
satisfy (21 ). By writing? - Zo in the para-conjugateof(72) as?+ Z 0 - 2Ro,
one obtains
(73)
and a pole of~ is a pole of (Z + Zo)- 1 . Since, at Po, this matrix coincides with
(? + Z)- 1 and since Z + Z may be identically singular even if Z + ? is
not, we have to distinguish two cases. First we prove that, if Z + Z is identi-
cally singular, (i + Zo)- 1 has a pole at Pofor arry Po. This is proved ab absurdo
from the identity
(? + Z)(Z + Zo)- 1 = ln + (Z - Zo)(? + Zo)- 1 (74)
If (Z + Zo)- 1were finite, say L, at Po, the second member of (74) would
reduce to In at Po and the equality of the determinants would give
= l 'F 0
det ( ~ + Z) det L
which contradicts the hypothesis det (Z + Z) = 0. We next prove that if
Z +? has normal rank n, Po is a pole of (Z + Zo)- 1 ijf it is a pole of (Z + Z)- 1 •
Rewrite (74) as
(Z + Zo)- 1 =?( + Z)- 1 [ln + (Z - Zo)(? + Zo)- 1] (75)
This equation is impossible at Po, if (? + Z)- 1 is infinite and (? + Z 0 )- 1
finite. Since (75) is an identity, one may interchange Zo and Z while leaving
? unaltered, and the opposite conclusion follows. Finally, a reduction of degree
is possible only at a pole Po of ( Z + Z )- 1 if Z + Z has normal rank n, but at
an arbitrary Po if Z + ~ is identically singular. ·~
26, If~ + Z is identically singular, so is Z + Z on the imaginary axis, and Z

is resistance-reduced in the sense of 10.2 for every jw, so the process of
Chap. IO applies without preliminary resistance extraction. We therefore
limit the following discussion to the case where Z +? has normal rank n.
Let M be a matrix ofrational functions and write M- 1 = adj M/det M.
If M, hence adj M, is finite at a pole of M- 1 , one necessarily has det M = 0
at such a pole. The matrix M- 1 may, however, have poles which are not
zeros of det M, if they coincide with poles of M itself. Since Z is analytic in
Rep >0, a pole Po of (Z +?)- 1 in Rep >0 is necessarily a zero of
det (Z + ~ ), unless? has a pole at Po. The matrix
Z= [ 1
l +2p
7P 2(1 :p)
1 + 3p]
(76)
offers an example of such a difficulty: one has
z +z = 12 -\--:=_-;-22
~ 3-5p
2(1 -p)
2(1:p)
3 +5p I (77)
and the determinant of (77) is the constant 7/4, so that ( Z + Z)- 1 and Z have
simultaneously a pole at p = 1. ~ ~
27. By (6.46) rewritten as (~ + ln) = 2(ln -~)- 1, On -§)- 1 is analytic

with ~ at Po, and the vector u is then determined by (25). By (73), (25) is
transformed into
or
(78)
at Po, if his defined by (35). Consequently, if Po is taken as a zero in Rep> 0
of det ( Z + ~), and if ~ is analytic at Po, the parameters ef the extracted section
ensuring a degree reduction are determined by (78) and (36), with the normalization
condition (38) equivalent to (2).
If ~ is not analytic at Po but has an analytic submatrix, a degree reduction is
ensured if h is taken as a solution ef (78) such that ~h is analytic at Po, that is, if
one takes as nonzero entries of h in (78) only the ones multiplied by analytic
entries of Z +~'for Z is analytic in Rep> 0. This immediately results from
the last remark of 11 and will be checked on the example (76): the principal
value of (77) for p = I +Bis
and (78) reduces to
After multiplying by e and making B = 0, one obtains h 1 = 0, and ~h is then

analytic at p = 1 for h2 arbitrary.
Finally, if~ has no analytic submatrix at Po, that is, if all entries of~
!
I have a pole at Po, one easily sees that ~- 1 vanishes at Po by considering the
McMillan form of Z. Since, on the other hand, (Z +~ )- 1 then reduces to
~- 1 at Po, it is impossible for Po to be a pole of ( Z + ~ )- 1, and this case does
not arise.
28. The extraction leads to an iterative synthesis process for an arbitrary

positive matrix. The process stops when ( Z + Z)- 1 has no poles in Re p > 0.
Since -Pt is a pole of ( Z + ~) - 1 with Po , the only remaining poles are
located on the imaginary axis (including zero and infinity). Let Z = Z1 + Z 2 ,
where Z1 is hurwitzian and Z2 para-odd. One has Z + ~ = Z1 + ?1, and
since Z1 and ~ 1 are analytic on the j-axis, Lhe poles of ( Z + ?)- 1 on this axis
ilt&.._ -- --
are zeros of the determinant. Since Z1 +? 1 coincides with Z1 + Z1 on this

axis, Z1 is then resistance reduced, and the synthesis of Chap. 10 is again
possible. We are thus left with the case where (Z +?)- 1 has no poles any-
where. It is then a constant matrix, to be denoted R- 1 ; one then has
Z = R + Z1 with Z1 para-odd, and the synthesis is immediate.
In all cases, the iterative process extracts only lossless elements and thus
realizes an arbitrary passive impedance matrix as a lossless passive 2n-port closed on a
passive resistance n-port. As shown in 15, the 2n-port of chain matrix (37) ex-
tracted at each step is the complex 2n-port section of degree 1 realized in
10.13, the only difference being that Po, and hence g, are complex. This adds
one real parameter, but since no preliminary resistance extraction is needed
(as was the case in Chap. 10), the total number of parameters is identical in
both methods, and the synthesis is canonic.
The process of Chap. 10 can be obtained as the limiting case of the
present process for oco tending to zero. Equation (78) tends to Roh= 0,
proportional to ( 10.3), whereas (36) then reduces to k = jXo h, thus showing
that one has k = jx by comparison with ( 10.12). With these substitutions and
oco=0, (37) reduces to (10.11). It remains to show that the relation (38)
tends to the normalization condition assumed in 10.9. Since (38) reduces to
0 = 0 for k imaginary and oco = 0, one has to use expansions up to the first
order in oco. By ( 10.13), one has Zo = Ro + jXo + oco Lo, and (36) gives more
accurately k =jx +ocoLoh, hence, by (10.42) hk =jf +ocohLoh. Equation
(38) then gives hLoh = 1 which agrees with (10.25-26) and (2). The above
reasoning corresponds to the one of 9.5 in the scalar case.
+
29. If Z is a positive real matrix, the poles of ( Z ?)- 1 in Re p > 0 are
either real or occur in conjugate pairs. At a real pole, the vector u solution of
(21) is real, and so is h defined by (35) or obtained as a solution of (78). Since
Z 0 is also real, so is k, and chain matrix (37) reduces to (53) defining a real
section of degree 1 realized in 15. The extraction of this section produces a
degree reduction of one unit and the residual matrix remains positive real.
In the case of complex conjugate poles of (Z +?)- 1 , assume that the
first extraction at some pole Po has been done with degree reduction, with
some vectors h and k. The corresponding complex section has the chain
matrix (37). If we then extract a second complex section at Pri, with para-
meters ha and ka defined by (10.67) and (43), we know, by 16, that both
sections combine into a real section which is the nonreciprocal 2n-port of
10.25. It remains to establish that the extraction of this combined real section
of degree 2 has produced a degree reduction by two units, which is not
obvious since the parameters of the second complex section have been
explicitly determined in such a way as to make the over-all section real rather
than to produce a second degree reduction. Owing to 27, what must be
proved in order to ensure the second degree reduction is that, if h satisfies (78)
with ~h finite at Po, then ha satisfies the similar equation
(79)
with ~ 1 ha finite at P6-
The residual impedance matrix Z1 after the first extraction is given by
(10.28) where A, B, C, D are the submatrices of (37). Using (36), one
obtains
Z1=P-lQ (80)
with
P= (Z - Zo)hh/(p -Po) - In (81)
Q = (Zo - Z)hk/(P-Po) - Z (82)
Owing to (39), one easily checks that Q! + P(l = Z + ~' so that one has
(83)
by (80). When both sides of (83) are premultiplied by h* and evaluated at
P6, one finds zero on the right, owing to the conjugate of (78) at P6, and (83)
will become
(84)
ifwe can show that f(Pt)*h is proportional to ha. This is checked as follows:
at Pt, the para-conjugate transpose of (81) is
P *) = [hh(Z0 - Z) _ 1 ] = hh(Z0 -~t) _1 (85)

~ (Po p + p't; n p; 2P~ n
In the product of (85) by h*, -~0*h* can be replaced by Z 0*h* owing to the
conjugate of (78); the expression h(~0 +
zt)h*/2pt appearing in the result
is the conjugate of h'(Z~ + Z 0 )h/2p 0 which is 'Y/, owing to (42) and its trans-
pose, where k is (36). The proof is completed by using (10.67).
To deduce (79) from (84), we must show that Pis nonsingular at Pt. We
prove more generally that P is nonsingular in Rep> 0. If P is singular, a
vector v c;i= 0, exists such that fJ(Z - Zo)h/(p -Po)= v with 8 =hv, and one
has 8 c;i= 0. Premultiplying by h(p - Po)/8, one obtains h(Z - Zo)h = p -Po
or
{-{o =P-Po (86)

for the positive function { = h Zh, where
{o = a:o - j/30 (87)
owing to (36) and to the conjugate transpose of (39). On the other hand, one
must have
I~~ +- ~b~o . PP +-Po

Pb I< 1 (88)
In Rep> 0 because this expression similar to (9.5) is bounded if~ is a posi-

tive function. Since, for the values (86-87), the left-hand side of (88)
reduces to
IP - PoP ++P6~o + ~6 I= IP - PPo++Pt2ao I= 1

the nonsingularity of P in Rep > 0 is proved ab absurdo.
It remains to show that ?tha is finite at P6· This expression is (}_f- 1ha by
(80) but reduces at P6 to (,lh*, since we proved that ha is proportional to
Ph*. By the same computation as that following (85), one obtains the value of
Qh* at P6 as Z 0*h* -ri* Z 0 h. This value is finite, since Zh is finite at Po by
~ ~
hypothesis and equal to -Zoh by (78).
We have thus proved that any real passive n-port is realizable as a real lossless
passive 2n-port closed on a real passive resistance n-port. Since in the iterative
process ensuring this realization all steps are degree reducing, the total
number of elements used in the synthesis is the number of parameters of the
prescribed matrix, and the synthesis is canonic.
+
If Po is not a root of det (Z ?), an extraction at Po without degree
reduction can still be made, in accordance with 24, with an arbitrary vector
h, except for the normalization condition (38), and this yields a residual
passive impedance matrix Zt. A second extraction, also without degree
reduction, can then be made at P6, based on the vector ha defined by (10.67).
If the corresponding vector ka defined by ka = Z1 ( P°t)ha satisfies (43), the two
conjugate sections of degree 1 combine into the nonreciprocal section of
degree 2 ofl0.25. Moreover, if his normalized so as to make Y/ real in (42), the
section of 10.25 is realizable with positive elements if Y/ satisfies ( 10.64). We
will now prove that (43) and (10.64) are automatically satisfied, thus
showing that an arbitrary section of degree 2 of 10.25 satiifying the normalization
conditions is extractable from any real passive impedance n-port, without degree
reduction.
By (80), the condition ka = Z1 ha at P6 is equivalent to Qha = Pka. By
(10.67), (43) will then be satisfied if one has
Q(h* -YJ*h) = P(k* -YJ*k)

at P6- With the values resulting from (81-82), this is equivalent to
[(Z0 - Zt)hk/2jWo + Zci'](h* -YJ*h) = [(Zt - Z 0 )hh/2jWo + In](k* -YJ*k)

and is easily checked by using (36), (39), and (42). Finally, if one defines
ha by (10.67) without the normalization factor t, one obtains for ka the
expression (43) without the same factor. If one then computes kaha as
mentioned after (43), one obtains (ao -jf30 )/t2 • Since Re kaha is the real part
of the positive function ha Z1 ha at P6, one must have i- 2 = l -YJYJ* > 0.
As a conclusion, we have established the inequality
lh'Zoh/Pol S 1
with Re Po > 0, Zo = Z(Po) for an arbitrary positive real matrix, and an
arbitrary (complex) vector satisfying (38), i.e.,
RehZ0 h = Repo
Owing to (35), the inequality can be rewritten as
lu'Ro-1!2zoRol/2ul2 < 1 + w~/a~
for an arbitrary vector u satisfying uu = I.
Reciprocal n-ports
30. In the remainder of this chapter, we extend to n-ports the Darlington
synthesis of one-ports in order to prove that any real reciprocal passive n-port is
realizable as a real lossless passive reciprocal 2n-port closed on a real passive reciprocal
resistance n-port. In order to achieve such a synthesis, it is sufficient to show (i)
that any extraction of a real section of degree l of chain matrix (53) can be
followed by a second extraction, without degree reduction, at the same
Po, and that the parameters of the second section can be chosen to make
reciprocal the combined section of degree 2 (generalizing the modified Brune
section of the one-port case), (ii) that any extraction of a real section of
degree 2 corresponding to a conjugate pair of poles of (Z +?")- 1 can be
followed by a second extraction, without degree reduction, at the same pair
of poles, and that the parameters of the second section can be chosen to make
reciprocal the combined section of degree 4 (generalizing the Darlington
section of the one-port case).
31. The treatment of case (i) of 30 is almost identical to the similar com-
bination of two real all-pass sections of degree l into a section of degree 2
discussed in 20--21. The chain matrix of the first extracted section is (53), and
the residual impedance matrix, resulting from (80-82) and using (36) with h,
k, and Zo real, is
Z1 = [ln - (Z - Z 0 )hh' /(p - a 0 )]- 1 [Z + (Z - Z 0 )hh' Zof(p - a0 )]
With the notation
L = [dZ/dPh=a 0
I•
Reciprocal n-ports 351
its value at oco is, by !'Hospital's rule,

(89)
The parameters of the second extracted section must now be determined
in order to make it the transpose of the first. This requires the 2-ports (oc, f3)
of both sections to be transposes of each other and the turn-ratios to be
identical. Since the turn-ratios are defined by the vectors h/ho and k/ko, the
second condition merely forces the vectors hb and kb of the second section to
be proportional to the vectors hand k, respectively. On the other hand, the
first condition forces the parameter oco in the second extraction to be replaced
by -oco. Condition (52) then reduces to
~=-~~ (~
and the normalization condition similar to (55) is
(91)
With the notation
>. =h'Lh (92)
defining a real scalar, one checks that
(1 n - hh'L)- 1h = h/(1 ->.) (93)
Since hb must be proportional to h, set hb = µ,h. Since Zo and L are symmetric
for a reciprocal n-port, (89), (90), (93), and (36) give
>. 1
kb=µ,--k
+ (94)
>. -1
and kb is automatically proportional to k as required. By (91) and (55), the
value of the proportionality constant is fixed as
µ, = [(l ->..)/(1 +>..)]11 2 (95)
andµ, is real, since it is easily verified that l>.I < 1 results from the fact that
(89) is known to be a positive matrix. Finally, the second section has the
chain matrix (53) where oco, h, and k are replaced by -oco, µ,h, and -k/µ,,
respectively, the value ofµ, being determined by (95) and (92). By (55) and
(95), the product of the chain matrices is obtained as (56), and the realization
is the one of 21.
32. In order to design the reciprocal section of degree 4 generalizing the

Darlington section, we have to compute, by (10.28), the residual impedance
matrix Zt after the extraction of a nonreciprocal section of degree 2 whose
chain matrix is of the form (58). The result is
Z1= [In -(ZH-X)KH']- 1 [Z + (ZH-X)KX'] (96)
In accordance with 29 and 17, the matrix K of (96) is (10.88) where p is

replaced by p - oco. For p = Po + e, where Po = oco + jwo, the principal value
of the matrix K so defined (neglecting terms in ei with i > 0) is
K =P/e -P/2jwo +Q
where, with the abbreviation (10.65),
-j(l +11)] (97)

1 +11
(98)
1 !11]
With the Taylor expansion near Po, Z = Zo + eL, where

L= [dZ/dp]p 0 (99)
one has, in (96),

(ZH-X)K = (ZoH-X)P(l/a - l/2jwo) + (ZoH -X)Q +LHP (100)
Note that Zo and L are symmetric for a reciprocal n-port, hence Ro and Xo
real symmetric. One easily checks, from definition (36) yielding
(101)
from the definitions (10.71) of Hand X, and from (97), that (Z0 H-X)P
vanishes identically, thus ( 100) reduces to its last two terms. On the other
hand, by ( 101) and the definition of Zo, one has
ZoH-X=[jXoh*, -Xoh*]
Finally, the replacement of H, X, P, and Q by their values transforms the
value of (96) at Po into
(102)
where
U=Lh(h-17h') +Xoh*(h' -17h)/wo (103)
V=Lh(k-17k') +Xoh*(k' -17k)/wo
33. Repeating on Zt the extraction of a nonreciprocal section of degree 2

at the same point, but with opposite gyrator polarities, is equivalent to
performing the extraction without polarity reversal on the transpose im-
pedance matrix z; and reversing the polarity in the result. Let Hb and Xb be
the matrices playing the roles of H and X in the second extraction. By
( 10.118), the turn-ratios of the transformer networks in both extractions
become identical (and this is certainly necessary for the cancellation of the
gyrators) if
(104)
where Ao and Bo are some nonsingular matrices of dimension 2. The first
relation (104) implies that the real and imaginary parts of the vector hb are
linear combinations of hr and hi, hence that hb is a linear combination of h
and h*, owing to (10.67). Conversely, from a relation of the form
hb = ah +bh* (105)
one deduces
[hbr, hbi] = [hr, hi] [ar + br (106)

bi - ai
thus defining the matrix Ao in (104).
From the transpose of (102), one deduces
Zi(ln - t2U')h = (Z0 + t2V')h (107)
In evaluating U'h and V'h from (103) a number of simplifications occur
owing to (42), (39), and to hXoh = ImhZoh = Imhk = -fJo. Moreover,
defining the scalar
h'Lh=v (108)
and using (102), one rewrites (107) as
Zf,hb = kb (109)
with
hb = [l+ t2(fJo/wo +riv)]h - t2[fJ071/wo + v]h* (110)
kb= [l - t2(fJo/wo +riv)]k + t2[fJ071/wo + v]k*
Since this defines hb as a linear combination of h and h*, and similarly for
kb, these expressions are coherent with ( 104) and may be adopted for the
parameters of the second extraction, except that a common complex factor
qe1¢ must be introduced in both expressions ( 110) in order to satisfy the
normalization conditions
kb hb = oi:o +jfJb ( 111)
hikb = 7/b(°'o +jWo) (112)

similar to (39) and (42), where oi:o and mo are identical to the parameters of
the first extraction (since the second extraction is done at the same point),
whereas fJb and 7/b may be different from fJo and 71 (but must be real).
The insertion of the values (110) multiplified by qei1 into (111-112) and
the separation ofreal and imaginary parts yields four equations into the four
unknowns q, <p, 71b, and f3b. By long but elementary computations based on
(39), (42) and (10.65), one deduces from (111)
q2 = [l - t2(v; + vf + 271/30 v,/Wo + f35/w5)]- 1 ( 113)
f3bjq2 = [f3o(l + 712 + v; + vf -f35/w5) + 271% v,]t2 ( 114)

Similarly, (112) gives
q2 [cxoy -Swo) cos 2</> - (cxo8 + woy) sin 2</>] = 71b°'D
(115)
q2 [(cxo8 +ywo) cos 2</> + (cxoy -Swo) sin 2</>] =71bwo
where the abbreviations
y=71[I +t2(v;-vf +2f30 v,/Wo71 +f35/w~] (116)
8 = 2t2Vt (/30/ wo + 71v,) ( 117)
have been used. The ratio of the expressions (115) determines <pas the solu-
tion of
tg 2</> = -8/y ( 118)
whereas the elimination of sin 2</> or cos 2</> gives
7lb COS 2 = -8q2 ( 119)
hence
(120)
Since the introduction of the phase factor ei1 operates on the real and
imaginary parts a transformation of the type ( 106) of matrix
sin<!>] ( 121)
cos <p
the transformation matrices in (104) are obtained as products of successive
transformations
Ao=qCQ; Bo=qDQ (122)
where C and D are deduced from ( 110) by a relation similar to ( 106) between
(104) and (105). This identification gives
C= 12 +E; D= 12-E (123)
with
(124)
34. It remains to combine both nonreciprocal sections of degree 2. The first

section has the parameter matrices H, X, and K. Relation (59) holds,
T = X 'H being (46), whereas Z 0 is ( 10.108) and Ze is deduced from ( 10.107)
by the replacement of g by -/3o in accordance with 16, thus
Ze = t[ Oa
wo-f-'O
(125)
The second section has the parameter matrices Hb, Xb and Kb, and Kb is
similar to K except that /3o and 'Y/ are replaced by /3b and 'Y/b, respectively. This
produces
(126)
where
(127)
by (104) and (46). Finally, the gyrator polarities must be reversed in the
second section, which means that the admittance matrix playing the role of
(10.105) must be replaced by its transpose. This transposes Zb, hence changes
the sign of Zbe, and changes Mb into -Mb. By (10.102) the last change of
sign is obtained, for instance, by changing the sign of Xob, hence of the matrix
Xb of which Xob is a submatrix, without altering the ratio matrix A in
( 10.118). After these changes, the relations ( 104) are replaced by
(128)
whereas (126-127) become Ki; 1 = zbo - zbe - Tb' Tb = -Bo T Ao' hence
(129)
The product of the chain matrix (58) by a similar matrix of parameters

matrices (128-129) yields the following chain equations for the combined
network:
va -vb= X[K -B0 KbAo +K(TA0 - T'B 0 )KbA0]H'vb

-X[K +BoKbBO -K(TAo - T'Bo)KbBo]X'ib (130)
ia + ib = H[K +Ao Kb AO +K(TAo - T'Bo)KbAo]H'vb
-H[K -AoKbBO -K(TAo - T'Bo)KbBo]X'ib
These equations are slightly more complicated than (61), owing to the
presence of the matrices Ao and Bo and to the fact that Tis not symmetric.
The further computations are, however, similar to the ones following (61 ). In
particular, the equations similar to (62-63) and defining the 4-port (a, /3) are
356 11. Factorization of scattering matrices:
obtained as
X0 1 v.. = [K -B0 KbAo +K(TA0 - TB0 )KbA0]H0vf1
(l 31)
+ [K +BoKbBO -K(TAo - T'Bo)KbBo](Xoi.. - THo 1 if1)
H 0 1if1 = [K +Ao Kb Ao +K(TA0 - T'B0 )KbA0]H0vf1
(132)
+ [K -A0 KbBo -K(TA0 -
T'B0 )KbBo1(X0i.. - TH0 1if1)
The difference of these equations is transformed into
Kb 1 (Ao +Bo)- 1 (Ho 1 ifl -Xo 1 v.. ) = AoHovf) -Bo(Xo i,,, - THo 1if1) (133)
On the other hand, the linear combination B0 1 (131) +A0 1 (132) gives
K-l(Bol + Aol)-l(Bol Xolv.. + Aolfiolifl)
= [1 2 + (TA 0 - T'B0 )KbA0]H0vf1 + [1 2 - (TA 0 - T'B 0 )KbB0]
(Xoi.. - Tn0 1if1) (134)
The elimination of X 0i.. - TH0 by [1 2 -B0(TA 0 - T'B0 )Kb] (133)
1 if1
+Bo (l34)takingintoaccounttheidentity (Bo 1 +Ao 1 ) - 1 Ao 1 (Ao +Bo) =Bo

gives
(K- 1
b -oB' TA O +B'O T'BO +B'O K- 1B O)(AO +BO)- 1H.-
O ifl
1
+ (B'0 K- 1Ao- K- 1 +B'O TA O -B'O T'BO)(AO +BO)- 1x-O 1v"

b
= (A 0+B0)H0vf1
A similar elimination of VfJ between ( 133) and ( 134) gives
(Kb 1 +Ao TAo -Ao T'Bo +AoK- 1AoHAo +Bo)- 1 x; 1 v..
-(Kb 1 +Ao TAo -Ao T'Bo -AoK- 1Bo)(Ao +Bo)- 1Ho 1 ifl
= (Ao +Bo)(x0i.. - Tn0 1if1)
The last two equations are easily put in the form
[!:] = [~:!::; ~:;::i] [~:] (135)

where
P= (Ao +Bo)-lXol (136)
Q = (Ao +Bo)-lfiol (137)
l H"" =Kb 1 +A0K- 1 A0 +Ao TA 0 -A0T'B0

H ..fl = (A 0+B0)T(A0 +B0 ) -Kb 1 -A0TA 0 +Ao T'B 0 +A0K- 1B 0
(138)
!
j Hf!" = B 0K- 1Ao - Kb 1 + B 0T A 0 - B 0T' B 0
(139)
( 140)
( HfJfJ=Kb 1 +B0K- 1B 0 +Bo T'B0 -B0 TA 0 (141)

!
35. By (59) and (129), (141) reduces to

Hfifi = Zbo - Zbe +B0(Z8 + Z + T' -
0 T)B 0 (142)
We now prove that the even terms of (142) vanish, that is,
zbe = Bo(Ze + T' - T)Bo (143)
so that ( 142) reduces to

(144)
Since both members of ( 143) are skew matrices, it is sufficient to check that
the entry 12 of Zbe, which ~s ({Jb -wo)/2 by analogy with (125) is equal to
det Bo times the entry 12 of Ze + T' - T, which is ({Jo - wo) /2 -{Jo by (125)
and (46). It is, therefore, sufficient to establish
wo -{Jb = (wo + {Jo) det Bo (145)

From (113), (114), and (10.65), one computes
w0 -{Jb = q2 t2 (w 0 +fJ0)[(1 - {J0 /w 0 )2 - (ri2 + v~ + v; + 277v,)] (146)
Since the matrix ( 121) is orthogonal, ( 122) gives det B 0 = q2 det D, and (145)
is easily established by comparing ( 146) with the value of det D deduced
from (123) and (124).
Similarly, one establishes that ( 138) reduces to
H~~ = zbo +Ao ZoAo (147)

the cancellation of the skew terms being due in this case to
Zbe = A02 8 A 0 + B0 T A0 - A0 T' B0
that is, to
(148)
owing to Tb= -B0 TAo resulting from (127) with a change of sign in Xb
due to the polarity reversal of the gyrator. Now ( 148) is equivalent to
wo + f3b = (wo -f3o) det Ao (149)
similar to (145) and verified in the same way.
By (59) and (129), (140) becomes
and we now prove that the odd terms cancel, that is, that one has
zbo =Bo ZoAo ( 151)

358 11. Factorization of scattering matrices:
By (122), this is equivalent to

q2 D'Z0 C= QZboil' (152)
since Q is orthogonal. By (10.108) and the expressions of D and C resulting
from (123-124), one obtains
D'Z0 C=
f [I +17-t [(1 +17)v;+(l -17)({30 /w 0 -v,) 2 ]
2 2t 2 vi(f30 /w 0 +17v1 ) ]
2 2t2vi(f30 /w 0 +1Jvr) 1 -17 - t2 [(l -17)v; + (I +17)((30 /Wo +v,)2]

(153)
On the other hand, (121) and the expression similar to (10.108) for Zbo give
(154)
The identity (152) is then easily verified by comparing (153) to (154) with the
help of (119), (116-117), and (113). Finally, (150) reduces to
(155)
In the expression obtained for Hap by (59) and (129), the odd terms
cancel owing to the transpose of ( 151), and the remaining terms are such that
one has
(156)
Owing to (156), the hybrid matrix in (135) takes the form (66), where N is a
constant ratio matrix. On the other hand, the submatrices Yr:x and Zp deduced
from (144) and (147) are symmetric and equal top times a constant matrix.
Consequently, the 4-port (oi, {3) is realized as Fig. 2 and the reciprocal section of
degree 4 has the same structure as the reciprocal all-pass section.
Ii,
:!
'.I
chapter 12
Unitary bordering of scattering matrices 1
Introduction
+
1. Let S be the scattering matrix of a lossless (n r)-port normalized to
unit resistances; Sis bounded para-unitary. We partition Sas
(n) (r)
[ Saa Sab] (n) (l)

Sba Sbb (r)
and terminate the r last ports on r unit resistances. We know from 6.10 that
the scattering matrix of the resulting n-port is the submatrix Saa of ( l).
Conversely, if it is necessary to synthesize a passive n-port of prescribed
scattering matrix Saa, one may try to border Saa by the additional sub-
matrices in ( l) to form a bounded para-unitary matrix S; the synthesis is then
+
achieved by realizing the lossless (n r)-port of scattering matrix S and
terminating its r output ports on unit resistances. The synthesis of general
networks is thus reduced to the synthesis of lossless networks, solved in
7.33-36.
2. For a given passive n-port, the prescribed matrix Saa must be bounded.
By theorem 7.23, this is equivalent to stating that Saa is hurwitzian and is
such that 1n - Saa Saa is positive definite on Rep= 0. Since the synthesis
of passive n-ports was achieved in Chaps. 10 and 11, we already know that
the bordering problem has at least one solution. We even know that a (real,
symmetric) bounded matrix Saa can be imbedded into a (real, symmetric) bounded
359
360 12. Unitary bordering of scattering matrices
para-unitary matrix S. We also know from theorem 7.27 that the minimum
number r of bordering rows and columns in (I) is fixed by the inequality
r > normal rank (In -~aaSaa)

It is clear that numerous solutions with r larger than the minimum
exist, since from any (real, symmetric) solution S of dimension n r1, a +
+ +
(real, symmetric) solution of dimension n r1 r 2 is deduced as S Sa +
where Sa is an arbitrary (real, symmetric) bounded para-unitary matrix
of dimension r2 •
3. If between the r output resistances and the lossless (n + r)-port one inserts
an all-pass 2r-port of scattering matrix
(r) (r)
[~ u] O
(r)
(r)
(2)
similar to (11.26), with U and V bounded para-unitary, the resistances

seen through the all-pass are unaltered, and the scattering matrix at the
+
n input ports is still Saa. On the other hand, the lossless (n r)-port equiva-
lent to the cascade combination of (I) and (2) has the scattering matrix
SabU] (3)
vsbbu
which is an immediate extension of (9.90). This shows that (3) is a solution
of the bordering problem with (1). Moreover, (3) is real with (1) and (2),
and symmetric with (I) for V = U'.
4. If one combines the results of 2 and 3, it is clear that numerous solutions

of the form schematically represented in Fig. I can be deduced from any
solution S, for instance from the ones indirectly obtained in Chaps. IO and 11.
s
unit
resistances
Sa
Fm. 12.l
Introduction 361
We wish, however, to obtain all solutions, and therefore start by writing the
para-unitarity relations S§ = I n+r in terms of the submatrices of ( l). This
gives the three distinct relations
§,aaSaa +.§baSba = In (4)
§,aaSab +,§baSbb = 0 (5)
§ab Sab +.§bb sbb = Ir (6)
The problem is, therefore, to find all solutions of the three equations (4, 5, 6)
in the three unknown hurwitzian submatrices Sab, Sba, Sbb, assuming that
Saa is given and bounded. Moreover, if Saa is real, so must be the solutions.
Also, if Saa is symmetric, and if one wishes reciprocal realizations, one must
have sba = s~b .
5. An essential tool in the solution of the bordering problem is the following

theorem (and algorithm) of Oono and Yasuura on polynomial matrices:
a para-hermitian unimodular matrix T, positive definite on the j-axis, can be factored
into T = [SK, where K is unimodular. Let s be the sum of the degrees of the
diagonal entries of T. We will prove that one has
(7)
where Xis unimodular and T1 para-hermitian unimodular positive definite
on the j-axis and such that the sum s1 of the degrees of the diagonal entries
of T1 is strictly smaller than s. By iteration one thus reduces the factorization
problem to the case s = 0, where all diagonal entries are constants. The
positive definiteness on the j-axis then forces all entries to be constants: if
some entry (i,j) were of degree k =I- I, hence ofleading term ti1pk, the princi-
pal value at infinity of the corresponding principal minor of dimension 2
would be -tij tt;(Jwl( -Jwl = -tij tt; w2 k < 0. Consequently, the case
s = 0 corresponds to a constant matrix, and the factorization is then classical,
for instance by the Gauss algorithm.
Let the rows and columns of The ordered in such a way that the degrees
of the diagonal entries form a nondecreasing sequence. This is realized by
a symmetric permutation matrix which can be incorporated in X in (7).
Since every diagonal entry tti of T is a para-even function, positive on the
j-axis, it cannot have a pole of odd order at infinity, and therefore has an
even degree 28t. Because of the ordering, one has 81 < 82 < ···<On. Define
the diagonal matrix
A= {P"•-t'J1, pt'J.-t'J., ... , pt'J.-6.-,, I} (8)
The matrix
S=ATA (9)
is polynomial. Its diagonal entry Sii = tii( -p 2) 6•- 6• has degree 2oi +
2(on - Oi) = 2on for all i. Since S is positive definite with Ton the j-axis,
no other entry of Scan have a degree >2on, by the argument of the preced-
ing paragraph. Consequently, Sis of the form
S= UpM. +V (10)
where U is constant with all Uii =fa O and where V is polynomial of entries
of degree 2on - 1 at most. If U were nonsingular, det S would be of degree
2non by ( 10). On the other hand, det T is constant in (9), and det S has
twice the degree of det A, which is (n - 1)on - L
oi in (8), so that one has
deg det S < 2(n - I)on
This contradicts the value 2non previously obtained, so U is singular.

We next prove that in the sequence U1, U2, ... , Un-1, Un= U of the
principal submatrices of U constructed on the first 1, 2, ... , n rows, one can
find a nonzero minor Ur of some dimension r such that the succeeding minor
vanishes (det Ur+1 = 0). Since one has det U1 = Uu =fa 0, one could prove,
by iteration on the subscript r, that det Un =fa 0, if the above statement were
not true. Since U, and all Ui, are hermitian positive definite, a singular
Ur+l is of the form
where c is some constant r-vector. With
the (r + l)th diagonal entry of CUr+1C then vanishes. This also holds for
BUB where B +
= C In-r-1• Writing
W=BSB ( 11)
one forms a matrix Win which no entry has a degree exceeding 2on (as was
the case for S), but where the entry (r + +
1, r 1) has a degree <2on, In
particular,
deg Wr+1, r+l < 2on (12)
I
I
I Set
( 13)
By (11) and (9), one has
( 14)
The equation G = ljH 363
If one partitions the diagonal matrix A into Ar+ ar+l +An-r-1, a direct
calculation based on the definitions of B and C yields
Ir
ABA-1 = [ ~ (15)
thus showing that (15) is polynomial, for ar+I divides all entries of Ar due
to the structure of (8), and unimodular. By (14), T1 is thus unimodular
para-hermitian and positive definite on the j-axis with T, and (7) is estab-
lished with X- 1 = ABA- 1. Finally, by (13), the ith diagonal entry of T 1 is
wii/( -p 2)1'n-1',, Since it is polynomial, one has
deg ( T1)ii = deg Wii - 28n + 28t
By (12), one then has
deg ( T1)ii < 28t
with a strict inequality for i = r +I. But 28t = deg Tii, and the strict
+
inequality for i = r I induces the strict inequality
L deg (T1)ii <I deg Tii
i i
and the reduction algorithm is completed.
The equation G = IJH

6. The first equation (4) is of the form
G=HH ( 16) •
where
(17)
Moreover, G is an (n · n)-matrix, given as para-hermitian (<;2 = G) and
positive definite on the imaginary axis, and has some normal rank p < n.
By 2, one has r 2 p, and in the present section we only investigate solutions
of (16) having the minimum dimension r = p::::; n. Consequently, H will be
an (p · n)-matrix of normal rank p, for a smaller rank of Hwould give for G
a rank smaller than its minimum p.
7. The hurwitzian solution Hof (16) is certainly not unique since from any
such solution H 1 other solutions can be deduced by
( 18)
with an arbitrary (r · r)-matrix V, bounded para-unitary: by (18), H2 is then
hurwitzian with H1 and V. By analogy with (3), H2 is said to contain the
left all-pass factor V. A matrix H, such that V- 1H is no longer hurwitzian

for any nonconstant bounded para-unitary Vi is called left all-pass free.
8. For any (p · n)-matrix H with p::::;: n of normal rank p, the matrix equation
HF= IP (19)
where F is an (n · p)-matrix, has at least one solution in F, which can be
obtained rationally, so that F is rational (real) with H. Any solution F
of (19) is called a right inverse of H, but we do not use the notation H-1
because F is generally not unique and because one has generally FH =I- 1n.
9. Let Hand H1 be two solutions of ( 16), both of normal rank p, and denote
by F a right inverse of H. From
ljH=lj1H1 (20)
and (19) and its para-conjugate, one deduces
IP -,f!f1H1F (21)
If one writes
(22)
(21) becomes fV = IP and shows that V 1s para-unitary. The matrix
lf1V=lj1H1F is ljHF by (20) and /j by (19). One thus has lj1V=lj,
y
hence by transposition H1 =Hand, by the para-unitarity of V,
H1=VH (23)
We have thus proved that any two solutions Hand H1 of (16), both of minimal
dimension, are related by (23), where Vis para-unitary.
10. Since Vin (23) is generally not bounded, so Vis not a physical all-pass
factor, we are not yet able to derive all solutions from a single left all-pass-
free solution. This result will be reached, however, after some considerations
based on the following lemma: if V is bounded para-unitary and V- 1 analytic in
Rep > 0, then Vis a constant unitary matrix. The proof is immediately derived
from the McMillan form (8.16) of V: the McMillan form of v-1 is
{g1/gn*, g2/g(n-l)*, ... } and can only be analytic in Rep > 0 if all the gi*
(which have zeros in Rep> 0 only, since the gi are Hurwitz polynomials)
reduce to constants. The McMillan form of V is thus a constant matrix,
and Vis unimodular. But a unimodular matrix has poles at infinity, which
is forbidden for a bounded matrix, unless it is constant.
('
11. We shall also need a second lemma: a para-unitary matrix is analytic on
the imaginary axis. The diagonal equations contained in yv = IP, for p = jw,
reduce to L lvi112 = 1 and forbid any ViJ to be infinite.
i
The equation G = l;fH 365
12. We now prove the following theorem: if (16) has a hurwitzian solution
H having a right inverse F analytic in Re p > 0, then ( l) such a solution is unique
except for an arbitrary constant unitary left factor, and (2) any other hurwitzian
solution H 1 is (23) with V bounded para-unitary. We first prove the second thesis:
let H 1 be a second hurwitzian solution; since F is analytic in Rep > 0, so is
V, given by (22). Since V has been proved para-unitary, it is also analytic
on Re p = 0, by lemma 11. Therefore V is hurwitzian, hence bounded
para-unitary. The first thesis is established ab absurdo: let H and H1 both
satisfy the hypothesis, so that their right inverses F and F1 are both analytic in
Re p > 0. Then, by virtue of the part of the theorem already established,
one has H1 = VH and H = V1H1 with some bounded para-unitary matrices
V and V1. But a comparison of these equations gives V- 1 = Vi, analytic in
Rep> 0, so that lemma 10 applies and Vis constant.
13. We finally prove that a hurwitzian solution H ef (16) has a right inverse F
analytic in Rep > 0 if! it is left all-pass free. The" if" part is proved ab absurdo:
assume H1 to be all-pass free and having no analytic right inverse; then by
theorem 12, H1 is of the form (23) where His the (unique) solution having
an analytic right inverse, and this shows that H1 is not all-pass free. Consider
now the "only if" statement and assume, ab absurdo, that the solution H
having an analytic inverse is not left all-pass free; this means that V- 1His a
hurwitzian solution of (16) for some bounded para-unitary V. But all solu-
tions of (16) are of the form V1H where Vi= V- 1 is bounded para-unitary.
This shows that V and V- 1 are simultaneously bounded para-unitary, hence
constant by lemma l 0. Finally the properties " having an analytic right inverse in
Re p > 0 " and " left all-pass free " are equivalent.
14. Having thus established that all hurwitzian solutions of ( 16) are dedu-
cible from a unique left all-pass-free solution, if it exists, we now prove the
existence of the left all-pass-free solution by constructing it. Let us first trans-
form G into its McMillan form M by writing
G=PMQ (24)
with P and Q unimodular. From G = Q, one also deduces

(25)
and the uniqueness of the McMillan form gives M =A;!. Let m = diag { m1,
m2, ... , mP, 0, ... , 0}. Since mt* =mt, to every pole (or zero) Po of mt in
Re p > 0 corresponds a pole (or zero) -p iJ in Re p < 0. Furthermore, mt
has no finite poles on Rep = 0, since Saa and§ aa have no such poles in ( 17).
Consequently, every mt is of the form At* DtAi where Ai groups all the zeros
and poles in Rep > 0, Ai* the ones in Rep < 0 and Di the zeros on Rep = 0.
Moreover, St is composed of factors (p - jw 0 ) only, and can thus be made

para-even (St* = St) by appropriately choosing the leading coefficient. If
one defines the diagonal matrices
A = {,\1, .•. , \ , 1, ... , 1}
!::,,. = {81, ... , Sp, 0, ... , 0}

one can write
I! M=A/::,,.A (26)
where A and A- 1 are hurwitzian, and where!::,,.=~ is polynomial.
From (24), (25), and M =Af, one deduces
PMQ= f:lMJ'
Hence, by (26)
or
(27)
Setting
(28)
one rewrites (27) as
(29)
By (28), where P and Q are unimodular, R is analytic in Rep :S;; 0, so that
R is analytic in Re p > 0. Since !::,,. is polynomial, (29) must be analytic
;verywhere (except at infinity), and R is thus a polynomial matrix. From
(29), one also deduces
·i !::,,.R-1 = R-1!::,,. (30)
Again, R-1 =A- 1P-1QA is analytic in Rep< 0, hence R- 1 in Rep~ 0, so
(30) is analyti~ every7vhere, and R- 1 is polynomial. Si~e both R and R- 1
are thus polynomial, R is unimodular.
Designate by !::,,.P the left-hand corner submatrix of dimension p of !::,,.,
+
so that one has !::,,. = !::,,.P 0n-p. Similarly, partitioning R into four sub-
matrices, one has
R!::,,. = [Raa
Rba
Rab][ !::,,.P
Rbb 0
O] = [Raa!::,,.p
0 Rba!::,,.p ~]
and similarly
!::,,.R = [ !::,,.p;{\'aa !::,,.pgba]
~ 0
The equation G=I;JH 367
so that (29) requires Rba = 0. Consequently, det R = det Raa det Rbb, and
both Raa and Rbb are unimodular. Finally, writing
(31)
n
one has
(32)
and (29) reduces to
(33)
Let us now write (24) as
G = g(g- 1PM)Q = gnQ (34)
where, by (26),
n = g- 1PM = g- 1 p~~A (35)
But (28) gives J'}R = g- 1Pl'} and substitution in (35) yields
n =AR~A
thus, by (34) and (32)
(36)
If one compares (36) with (16), it is clear that one has progressed
towards the required factorization: due to JJ' = IP resulting from (31),
Q- 1A- 1J' is a right inverse of JAQ, and both matrices are hurwitzian, so
J AQ can appear as right factor in H. It remains to factor Raa ~P, where
Raa is unimodular and ~P polynomial and diagonal. Note that, by (36),
Raa ~P is positive definite on the imaginary axis as G. Consequently, the
diagonal entries of Raa ~P can only have zeros of even order. Since a zero of
Di appears as a zero of the same order in every entry of the ith column of
Raa~p (since Raa is polynomial), hence in particular in the diagonal entry
(i, i), Di can only have zeros of even multiplicity. One thus has 8i = <pi <pi*,
with <pi para-even or para-odd. Defining the diagonal matrix
one thus has

(37)
By the left-hand member of (33) and (37), all entries of column i of Raa ~P
are divisible by <pi; by the right-hand member of (33), all entries of row
i of Raa ~P are divisible by <pi. Since the diagonal entry (i, i) is divisible
by cp;, one has
(38)
where Tis a polynomial matrix. On the other hand, one has T = T by (33)
and the para-even character of ~P. Finally, taking the deter~inants of (38)
and (37), one shows that Tis unimodular with Raa.
By (38), (36) becomes
G = g~J''!!PT'1>,JAQ
With the notation AP= {,\1, ... , ,\p}, one has JA = AP J. Finally writing
'¥ = '1>P AP which defines '¥ as diagonal and hurwitzian, with an inverse
analytic in Rep > 0, one obtains
G = (lJ''fT'YJQ (39)
Since T is still positive definite on the j-axis with G, and is unimodular,
theorem 5 applies and one has T = .[SK, where K is unimodular with T.
A solution of ( 16) is then
H=K'YJQ (40)
It is hurwitzian with'¥, since Kand Qare polynomial. Moreover, the matrix
Q- 1J''¥- 1K- 1 is a right inverse of (40) and is analytic in Rep> 0 with '¥-1
because Q- 1 and K- 1 are polynomial since Q and Kare unimodular.
The basic solution

15. In the preceding section, we found all solutions Sba of minimum dimen-
sion of (4), and we have now to complete the solution for Sab and Sbb,
using (5) and (6). The system (4, 5, 6), however, is equivalent to the one
obtained by writing S§, = 1n+r, that is,
Saa§aa + Sab;2ab = 1n (41)

11 Saa;2ba + Sab;2bb = 0 (42)
.I
Sba;2ba + sbb§,bb = Ir (43)
Equation (41) in the unknown submatrix Sab is similar to (4) in the
unknown Sba. By writing its transpose as
one falls back to form (16). In order to arrive at a solution of minimal

dimension p, it is necessary to prove that for any matrix M, 1n - M]yf and
In - }yfM have identical normal ranks and are simultaneously positive de.finite on the
j-axis. Note that the theorem is physically nearly obvious, for one changes
an n-port of matrix Minto an n-port of matrix¥ by reversing all gyrators,
by replacing all imaginary resistances by their conjugates and by considering
the resulting network at -P'ri instead of Po.
The basic solution 369
16. A direct proof of the equality of normal ranks runs as follows. Let Po be
arbitrary but not a pole of M nor of AJ· If x -=I= 0 is a vector satisfying
(44)
the identity
M(ln -AJM) = (In -MAJ)M (45)
shows that one also has
(In -MAJ)y=0 (46)
with
y=Mx (47)
But (44) and (4 7) yield
(48)
so that one has y -=I= 0, otherwise (48) would give x = 0 contrary to our initial
hypothesis. Consequently, for every vector x -=I= 0 satisfying (44) there is a
vector y -=I= 0 satisfying (46). This shows that both matrices have identical
ranks at Po, thus almost everywhere.
A direct proof of the simultaneous positive definiteness of 1n - SS and
In -SS on the j-axis immediately results from (7.23) if Sis a scattering
matrix accepting an impedance matrix: it is sufficient to replace S by S
and Z by Zin (7.23) where the left-hand side is thus unaltered. If Z does
not exist, a 0S having an impedance matrix exists by 7.21 and the proof
works for 0S, thus proving the theorem for S.
17. We will now prove that for the solutions of minimum dimension (r = p), the
system (4, 5, 6) is algebraically equivalent to the system (4, 5, 41). The proof
amounts to showing that (6) is a consequence of (4, 5, 41). Assume thus that (4)
has been solved for Sba with r = p; this matrix accepts a right inverse Tba
such that
(49a)
Similarly (41) is solved for Sab, and this matrix accepts a left inverse Tab
such that
(49b)
Then (5) premultiplied by Tba gives, by the transpose of (49a)
sbb = - Tba§aaSab (50)

On the other hand, Tab (41) Sab gives, by (49b),
TabSaa§aaSab +§abSab = Ir
By (5) this equation is transformed into
-TabSaa§,baSbb +§abSab = lr
and, in order to establish (6), it is sufficient to show that one has
(51)
This is proved as follows. From the identity (45) written for Saa, one deduces
by (4) and (41)
hence by operating by Tab · · · Tba
Instead of (51), it is thus equivalent to establish
but this is the transpose of (50) and is thus proved.

Finally, in the case r = p, Eq. (5) determines Sbb uniquely in terms of
the other submatrices of (1): the difference X of two solutions (a matrix
of dimension p) would satisfy Sba = 0 which requires X = 0 for it was proved
in 6 that Sba has rank p. Con:~equently, the solution (50) of (5) is unique.
18. If Sba is the left all-pass-free solution of (4) and Sab the right all-pass-
free solution of (41), the unique submatrix Sbb computed by (50) is not
necessarily hurwitzian, as is obvious from the very form of (51). We know,
however, that every hurwitzian solution of (4) is VSba and, similarly, Sab U
for (41), U and V being arbitrary bounded para-unitary matrices. Since
Vf = l r, (49a) gives VSba Tba f = l r and Tba f is a right inverse of VSba.
Consequently, [ba must be replaced by V[ba in (50), and Sab by Sab U.
This replaces sbb by vsbb u, and the resulting new solution is (3). Let us
call the basic solution of the bordering problem the matrix based on the left
all-pass-free Sab and the right all-pass-free Sba. This solution may be unphysi-
cal, since the associated Sbb computed by (50) is not necessarily hurwitzian.
The above argument has proved, however, that every physical solution ef
I
• minimum dimension (n +p) is deducible from the basic solution by (3), that is, by
the insertion ef a physical all-pass at the output ports. Moreover, the basic (nonphysi-
I cal) solution is unique except for arbitrary constant unitary matrices U and V; this
,I
results from the similar uniqueness of the basic submatrices Sab and Sba,
which determine Sbb uniquely.
Physical solutions of minimum dimension 371
Physical solutions of minimum dimension

19. It remains to discuss the various ways in which U and V can be deter-
mined in order to make the derived sections physical, that is, the submatrix
VSbb U (where Sbb refers to the basic solution) hurwitzian, and to choose
among these solutions the ones yielding an over-all matrix of the smallest
possible degree. By lemma I I, we already know that Sbb has no poles on the
j-axis, for it is a submatrix of a para-unitary matrix. Consequently, it is
sufficient to compensate the possible poles of Sbb in Rep > 0 by zeros in the
numerators of U and V.
20. Imagine that U and V are factored into para-unitary matrix factors of
degree I, of the form (II .4). One thus transforms sbb into vsbb u by iterating
the operation " pre- or postmultiplication by a para-unitary matrix of
degree I ". Any individual operation of this type is useful only if the chosen
matrix of degree I suppresses some pole in Rep > 0 of the matrix M already
obtained at that stage (or reduces by one unit the degree of some multiple
pole in Re p > 0). Let Po be the pole of degree 8, to be reduced to degree
8 - l in VM, where Vis (I 1.4) with n replaced by r. Atp0 , VM is (Ir - uu)M,
and the condition of degree reduction is the one of 11. 7: if Tis the McMillan
residue of Mat Po, one must have rank (Ir -uu) T < rank T. As in 11.7,
this condition is satisfied if u is defined by ( I l .20 )where x is an arbitrary
nonzero vector. A similar degree reduction can be obtained by postmulti-
plication: it is sufficient to reason on the transpose matrices. Note, also, that
for a pole of degree I, T has rank 1, so that u, as defined by ( I 1.20), and the
normalization condition flu = I, is unique. On the other hand, for a pole
of degree 8, u can be chosen arbitrarily in a subspace of dimension 8.
From the above procedure, it is clear that, in general, numerous physical
solutions can be derived from the unique basic nonphysical solution, for the
order in which the individual poles in Rep> 0 are deleted is arbitrary,
because the vectors u are somewhat arbitrary in the case of multiple poles,
and because each individual pole can be compensated by a left or right
factor (in the nonreciprocal case, alone considered at present). Since,
however, the determinant of a matrix of degree I is (P-Po)/(p +Pt), the
determinant of UV is uniquely determined by the poles in Re p > 0 of Sbb
and their multiplicities. Finally, the determinant of (3) is (det S)(det UV),
where S is the basic solution, and is also unique. Since the degree of a
para-unitary matrix is the one of its determinant and since det UV is of
minimal degree when U and V are only composed of useful factors, the
above procedures gives all solutions of minimum degree for the given dimension
n +r=n +p.
21. For V = Ir, the matrix (3) is
[ Sn S12 U] = S(l + U)
S21 S22 U n ·
and contains an all-pass factor in its last r columns. Conversely, a bounded

matrix Sis called all-pass free in its last r columns if there exists no para-unitary
+
matrix U of dimension r such that S( l n U)- 1 is bounded. Imagine again
that U is factored in para-unitary matrices of degree 1, so that ln U is +
decomposed into factors of the type
1
n .
+ (1r -p20(o uil)
- - -1
20(o Ua ila
+ Pt - n+r - -p-+,Pt- (52)
where Ua is an (n + r)-vector formed by n zeros followed by the r entries of

u. The matrix S contains the all-pass factor (52) on the right, if a vector ua
exists satisfying S(po)ua = 0, that is, if
[~:: t::] [~] = 0
at Po, which simplifies to
[t::]u=O (53)
and requires the matrix in (53) to have rank< rat Po. This is impossible for
all Po in Re p > 0 iff
rank [ t::] = r everywhere in Rep >0 (54)
and condition (54) is, therefore, necessary and sufficient for S to be all-pass free
in its last r columns.
One similarly defines a matrix all-pass free in its last r rows, and derives
the condition
rank [Sba, sbb] = r in Rep > 0 (55)
Finally conditions (54) and (55) taken together characterize (n + r)-ports
which are all-pass free at their last r ports.
22. We now prove that all physical solutions of minimum degree are all-pass free
at their last r ports. We prove only that the solutions are all-pass free in their
last r rows, for the proof for the columns is similar. What we have to prove
is (55) for the derived matrix, that is, for
(56)
Physical solutions of minimum dimension 373
Since Sba, given by (40), is left all-pass free, it has rank r everywhere in
Rep> 0, and the rank of (56) might fall below r only at the zeros of det V.
To show that even that is impossible, we prove that at every pole Po of
degree oof Sbb U in Rep > 0, the matrix [Sba, Sbb U] has rank r. This matrix
will then contain a minor of dimension r whose determinant has k/(p - Po)"
with k =f O as principal value; since det V must contain ( p - Po) 6 in order to
allow V to compensate the pole of degree o of Sbb U, the corresponding minor
of order r of (56) will have a finite nonzero value at Po. It thus remains to
prove that the span rif every pole in Rep > 0 of [Sba, Sbb U] is r. Let t be the
span of Po as a pole of Sbb U, so that Sbb Uhas at least one minor of dimension
t whose determinant has a pole of order o. Our statement will be established
if we can show that Sba contains at least one minor of dimension r - t based
on the complementary r - trows, which does not vanish at Po. But the basic
solution Sba is (40), whose McMillan form 'YJ has neither zeros nor poles in
Rep > 0, so that it is impossible for all its minors of dimension r - t based
on some rows to vanish in Rep > 0.
23, Our last theorem is as follows: the degree rif all physical solutions rif minimum
degree is deg Saa. In view of the two previous results it is equivalent to prove
that if S of the form ( 1) is bounded para-unitary, and all-pass free in its last r rows
and columns, then deg S = deg Saa. Write S = P MQ, where Mis the McMillan
form of S, a diagonal matrix of the type discussed in 8.20. Since S has at least
rank r in Rep> 0, the numerators of the first r entries of M can have no zeros
in Rep > 0. In view of the form of M, the denominators of its last r entries
can then have no zeros in Rep> 0. Since, however, these denominators are
Hurwitz polynomials, they must reduce to constants. If M is partitioned
into Ma +Mb, of dimensions n and r, respectively, Mb is thus polynomial.
The principal part of Sat any of its poles Po is then due to Ma alone. If P and
Q are partitioned conformally with M, the principal part of S is
(57)
whereas
Saa=PaaMaQaa (58)
To prove that every pole of Ma (to be denoted -ft since it is in Rep < 0)
gives the same contribution to the degree in ( 5 7) and ( 58), it is necessary to
show that one has
rank Li[Qaa, Qab] = rank LiQaa (59)

and
rank [ Paal
Pba Li = rank Paa Li (60)
at every pole, where ~ designates the matrix of the residues of the entries of
Ma, which can be taken as It +on-t, t being the span of the pole. We will
establish only (59), using the all-pass free property of S in its last columns,
(60) being proved in dual fashion from the similar property on the rows.
If (59) were not true, there would exist a row-vector z, such that
z~Qaa = 0
z~Qab =u =pO
where iJ, is some row-vector, at -p?;. The transpose equations can be com-
bined into
at Po. Since Q is unimodular, one deduces
(61)
Note that only the first t entries of ~z are nonzero. On the other hand, t is
the span of Po as a pole Ma, hence of M (for Mb was polynomial), so that at
least the first entries ofM- 1 vanish at Po. Consequently, the left-hand member
of (61) vanishes when premultiplied by ~- 1 . Premultiplying the result by
f- 1 which is unimodular, one obtains
where the first n entries of ua are zero, and this contradicts our hypothesis on
the all-pass-free property of the last columns.
The above theorem yields a new proof of the realizability of any passive
+
n-port of degree 8 by a nondissipative (n p)-port of degree 8 closed on
p ( ~n) resistances, a theorem already obtained in 11.28.
24. For real matrices, the basic (unphysical) solution is also real, for the
factorizationofl4 yields real factor matrices Sab and Sba, and Sbb is then real
in (50). The derived physical solutions are also real, provided U and V are
real. Since any poles in Rep > 0 of Sbb are real or occur in conjugate pairs,
and since T, hence u = Tx for real x, is real in the first case, only the case of
conjugate poles Po and Pri needs a special discussion. Let T be the McMillan
+
residue matrix at Po and choose V = I, - 2oc 0 uu/(p p"fi) with some u = Tx.
The degree of Po as a pole of VSbb has thus been decreased by one. At p"fi, the
McMillan residue matrix of vsbb is Ta= (1, -ocouujp"fi) T*, for sbb was
assumed a real matrix, and a degree reduction at p"fi will occur in Va VSbb if
Symmetric solutions of minimum dimension 375
Va = I, - 2<X.0 ua uaf (p - Pt) with some ua = Ta xa . If one takes xa = x*, one

obtains successively
ua = Tax*= (I, - <X.0 uu/pt) T*x* = (1, - <X.0 uu/pt)u* = u* -71*u (62)
as in (11.13). If ua is then properly normalized, the product VaV is (11.9),
which has been proved a real matrix in 11.5.
Symmetric solutions of minimum dimension

25. If the prescribed Saa was symmetric, the right all-pass-free solution Sab
of (41) is the transpose of the left all-pass-free solution Sba of (4), for these
equations are the transposes of each other. By a comparison of (50) with the
solution -Sba§ aa [ ab of (42), sbb is also symmetric and the entire basic
(unphysical) solution is symmetric. A derived physical solution, however, will
be symmetric only if V' = U in (3). Since the individual first-degree factors
of U and V are chosen so as to compensate the poles in Rep > 0 of Sbb, excess
factors will certainly be introduced by the symmetry requirement if Sbb has
poles of degree 1 in Rep > 0. Consequently, no derived physical solution can
be all-pass free both in the last r rows and columns in that case, and one will
have deg S > deg Saa. This means that, although the realization of a passive
+
reciprocal n-port as a reciprocal nondissipative (n p)-port closed on p re-
sistances is always possible, it generally requires more than the minimum
number of reactive elements (specified by the degree). This is, of course, in
line with the results of 11.30-35.
It is interesting, however, to determine under what conditions an all-pass
matrix V= (1, -2<X.0 uu)/(p +Pt) can be found such that the degree of Po
as a pole of VSbb V' decreases by two units with respect to the degree of Sbb.
As in 8.21, we write Sbb = PMQ where the denominators of the McMillan
form M contain p - Po at the successive powers a1 > a2 > · · · > at, where t
is the span of the pole, and 8 =Lai its degree. The McMillan residue matrix
is then T=Po(A +or-t)Qo, where Po and Qo are the values of P and Q
atpo.
26. We first consider the case a 1 > 2 of a multiple pole (note that a1 is the order
of the pole, as distinct from its degree) and denote by u the first column of Po,
normalized to uu = I. One has u -::/= 0, for otherwise det Po = 0, which is im-
possible for P unimodular. Since the first column of (Ir - uu)Po is propor-
tional to (Ir - uu)u = 0, one has
rank (Ir - uu)T < rank T (63)
which was the condition for degree reduction in 11.7. Moreover, the numera-
tors of the first column of VP are thus divisible by p - Po so that R =
(p + P't) VP[(p -p0 ) - 1 +l,_ 1] is a polynomial matrix. Equating the deter-

minants, one obtains det R = (p + p"ty- 1 det P, since det V = (p -Po)/
(p + P°t), so det R does not vanish at Po. Since VP= (p + P°t)- 1R[(p -Po)
+ Ir], one has
(64)
where
N=[(P-Po) flr]M
so that the denominators of N contain p - Po at the successive powers
a1 - 1, a2, ... , ai, 0, ... , 0. Consequently, the span of Po as a pole of Sbb is
still t (because Ro is nonsingular), and its degree has decreased by one unit
due to the replacement of a1 by a1 - 1. Except for a constant factor, the
McMillan residue of (64) is
Ta= Ro(!). f 0r-t) Qo (65)
The degree of Po as a pole of VSbb V' will decrease by two units if
rank Ta(Ir - u*u') < rank Ta

or, transposing, if
rank ( 1, - uu) T~ < rank T~ (66)
But Sbb is symmetric, and so is its McMillan residue, so that one also has
hence by (65)
But p~- 1Rb is nonsingular, thus (66) is equivalent to (63). In conclusion, the
symmetric reduction by two units, of the degree of a multiple pole, is always possible
without introducing excess factors.
27. Now let Po be a simple pole of any degree S of Sbb. The principal value of
Sbb is then T/(p -Po) where Tis a constant matrix of rank S coinciding with
the McMillan residue. Clearly, if S = 1, a simple factor Von one side will
reduce the degree to zero, and no further reduction is needed, so the require-
ment of symmetry can only be met by excess factors. It remains to discuss
the case S > 2. If Vis based on some admissible vector u ensuring the first
reduction of degree, the McMillan residue of VSbb will be
(67)
Symmetric solutions of minimum dimension 377
and a degree reduction of two units in VSbbV' requires (66). By the same
process which was used on Tin 11.7, (67) is equivalent to requiring some
vector y -=I= 0 such that
r:y=u (68)
By (67), and the symmetry of T, this requires
T(lr - u*u')y = u (69)
By setting
(lr -u*u')y = z (70)
Eq. (69) becomes
Tz=u (71)
Premultiplying (70) by u', one obtains
u'z=0 (72)
owing to the normalization condition for u, hence
z'Tz=0 (73)
by (72) and the symmetry of T. Therefore, a necessary condition for the symmetric
reduction by two units ef the degree ef a simple pole, without excess factors, is the
possibility effinding a vector z satisfying (73) and yielding a nonzero vector u in (72).
We now prove also that the condition is sufficient. With the notation (71), (73)
becomes (72). It remains to show that (72) is sufficient to enable one to find
a nonzero solutiony of (70), for one may then go back from (70) to (69) and
(68). Now (70) is solvable iny if the rank of lr -u*u' coincides with the rank
of the same matrix bordered by z, that is, if every row-vector v' such that
v'(Ir-u*u')=0 (74)
also satisfies
v'z=0 (75)
But the only solution of (74) is v' = u', so that (75) coincides with (72) and
the sufficiency is thus established.
28. For a real matrix and a real simple pole z1, u and Tare real and condition
(73) means that the residue matrix T must be indefinite. Since T is symmetric,
this means that its diagonal transform must contain at least two nonzero
entries of different signs. In contrast, for a complex pole, T and z are complex
and (73) can always be satisfied if T has rank two at least, that is, for a pole ef
degree o ~ 2: let T = N '11N with N and 11 generally complex, and 11 diagonal;
with Nz = w, (73) becomes w'l1w = 0, that is, Ioiw; = 0 or
(76)
with qi= w;.

The linear relation (76) can always be satisfied for some qi,
and one then takes
(77)
Once the symmetric degree reduction has been realized at the complex pole
Po,the similar reduction at Pri is ensured by a matrix Va based on ua defined
by (62), and the product Va Vis again real.
29. A real symmetric n-port of degree m is realized as a real symmetric

(n +p)-port of identical degree iffthe processes of degree reduction by two
units just described can be applied iteratively until all poles in Rep > 0 of
Sbb are suppressed. It is immediately clear from the above procedures that
this succeeds for complex poles of even degree. For real poles, on the other hand,
one must consider the sequence a1 , a2 , ••• , at of the corresponding exponents
in the denominators of the McMillan form. Every ai > 2 can be reduced by
steps of 2 to become l or 0. After this process, one obtains a sequence of re-
duced exponents ai (mod 2), some of which may be zero and are disregarded.
The remaining sequence is composed only of ones, so that the pole has be-
come simple. The rank of the corresponding residue matrix T can then be re-
duced by two units if (73) is satisfied. For a successful iterative application
of the process, the rank must be even, and the resulting residue matrix must
be such that a condition similar to (73) is satisfied at every step. Let ~ be
some diagonal transform of the initial residue matrix T. In every reduction
of the rank by two, one negative and one positive entry of~ are cancelled,
and the reduction can only proceed till the end if ~ had initially as many
positive as negative entries. This means that the signature of~, hence of T,
must be zero. To conclude, the reduction process is possible for a simple pole if!
the associated residue matrix has zero signature (it then has necessarily even rank).
Solutions of nonminimum dimension

30. Let us first investigate the hurwitzian solutions of ( 16) of dimensions
r · n, with r > p. Let H1 be such a solution and designate by H the left all-pass
free solution of 14. One deduces (21) as in 9, and V, defined by (22), is still
'J, hurwitzian and satisfies fV = IP, but is now a rectangular matrix of dimen-
sions r · p. One may, however, border V by r - p additional columns to make
a matrix W, hurwitzian and para-unitary, thus satisfying ~W =Ir. A
matrix W can, for instance, be obtained as follows: with the partition
(p) (r -p)
(p)
(r-p)
[Wu
W21
Solutions of nonminimum dimension 379
and the fact that Wu and W21 compose the known matrix V satisfying fV = IP,
one has JfuWu +Jf21W21 = IP ,and IP - J;fuWuispositive definite on the
imaginary axis. By theorem 16, one sees that I - Wu Jfu is also positive
definite on the j-axis and one can find a right all-pass-free solution W12 of
the equation I - Wu Jfu = W12 Jf12. Finally, W22 is obtained by solving
the linear equation Wu Jf21 +
W12 Jf22 = 0 similar to (42), and the solution
is obtained by premultiplying the equation by the left inverse of W12. If now
W22 is not hurwitzian, it can be made so by inserting all-pass factors as in
19-20. After all that, W is hurwitzian and para-unitary. Since the first p
columns of W are V, one has
V=WJ' (78)
with
(79)
As in 9, one then writes !f1V = lj1H1F= IJHF= H, hence fH1 = H. On

the other hand, from fV = IP' one deduces fVH = H, hence by difference
with the previous equation f(H1 - VH) = 0. One thus has
H1 -VH=X (80)
where X is the general solution of
VX=0 (81)
Replacing H1 and lj 1 in (20) by their values deduced from (80), and using
(81) and its transpose, one obtains ~ X = 0, hence X = 0, and (80) then
gives H1 = VH hence
H1= WJ'H (82)
by (78). We have thus proved that every hurwitzian solution of dimensions
n · r (r > p) of ( 16) is deduced by (82)from the left all-pass free solutionH of dimension
n · p, where J is (79) and Wan arbitrary bounded para-unitary matrix of dimension r.
31. Let Sab, Sba, Sbb designate the submatrices of the basic (unphysical)
+
solution of dimension n p of the bordering problem for Saa. We now want
to find the most general physical solutions of dimension n r with r > p.+
From the last theorem, we know that the submatrices replacing Sba and Sab
of the basic solutions are of the form VJ'Sba and Sab JU, respectively. Let Y
denote the (yet unknown) submatrix replacing Sbb. The relation similar to
(5) for the derived solution is
!}__aaSabJU +§,baJf = 0
!
'
'
I 380 12. Unitary bordering of scattering matrices
Premultiplying by [ba and using (50), one obtains

I
sbbJU=Jf,Y
or
(83)
where
Z= VYU (84)
Similarly, (42) for the derived solution is

Saa§'.baJ[ + SabJU"f, = 0
Replacing SaaS ba by -SabS bb, since (42) holds for the basic solution, and
premultiplyintby Tab, on; obtains §'.bbJ[ = JUY,, hence VJ'Sbb = HjJ',
or
J'Sbb= ZJ' (85)
Let Z, which is square of dimension r as Y, be partitioned
(p) (r-p)
(p) [Zu
(r -p) Z21
Condition (83) reduces to
Zu = sbb;
whereas condition (85) gives similarly
Zu = sbb;
+
so that Z is a direct sum Sbb Sa where Sa (denoting the submatrix previously
called Z22) is square of dimension r - p. By (84) one then has
Y = V(Sbb + Sa)U
and the general solution of dimension n + r is
,, [ Saa
I· VJ'Sba
and can be represented in the form
( 1n + V) ~ (1 n +U)
+
where ~ is the direct sum of the basic solution of dimension n p and of Sa.
Clearly Sa must be para-unitary but is otherwise arbitrary. In particular, Sa
need not be hurwitzian, for its poles in Rep > 0 can be compensated by U
Symmetric solutions of minimum degree 381
and V, together with the poles of Sbb. Consequently, every physical solution is
derivable by the schematic of Fig. 1 from the basic nonphysical solution S and an
arbitrary (nonphysical) lossless (r - p)-port of matrix Sa, by the insertion of a physical
all-pass 2r-port.
Symmetric solutions of minimum degree

32. From 22-23 we know that a bounded para-unitary matrix S of (possibly
nonminimum) dimension n + r of prescribed submatrix Saa of dimension n
is of minimum degree (equal to deg Saa) iff Sis all-pass free in the last r rows
and columns. We also know from 25 that, in general, there is no·symmetric
solution of minimum dimension n + p and minimum degree when the pre-
scribed Saa is symmetric. We will now show that there are many (real) sym-
metric solutions of minimum degree for sufficiently large dimension n + r (r > p) and
next determine the minimum value of r for which such symmetric solutions exist.
Starting from the basic (nonphysical) solution of dimension n + p, we first
delete all poles in Rep > 0 of Sbb which can be symmetrically deleted without
introducing excess all-pass factors. After that process, the new Sbb has only
two kinds of poles in Re p > 0:
(a) complex poles <Xi+ }wi (,xi> 0) of degree one

(b) simple real poles <Xi> 0 with positive-definite or negative-definite
residue matrices Ti. We shall denote by Ti the rank of Ti and define a symbol
ei of value +I or -1 according to as Ti is positive or negative definite.
33. According to 31, the most general solution is deduced from the basic
solution by adding directly to it an arbitrary para-unitary matrix Sa (not
necessarily hurwitzian) and then by inserting additional all-pass factors. We
now show that a symmetric Sa can be chosen which allows a further symmetric
elimination of the remaining poles, of types (a) and (b) of Sbb, without excess
factors. Since symmetric elimination is only possible for complex poles of
degree 2, or for simple real poles with residue matrices of zero signature, it is
necessary to insert additional poles in Sa in order to comply with the above
+
requirements in the direct sum Sbb Sa. Consider the para-unitary function
<po= TIP +Pi (86)

i P-Pi
where the product extends to all complex poles of type (a). Consider further
the para-unitary diagonal matrix of dimension Ti
(87)
and take for Sa the direct sum

(88)
where the <l>i cover all poles of type (b). The matrix Sa is clearly para-unitary
+
and Sbb Sa satisfies all the requirements for symmetric degree reduction
without excess factors. This is so because every pole of type (a) of Sbb has
+
become a pole of degree 2 of Sbb Sa, due to the additional pole in <po, and
because every pole of type (b) of Sbb has become a similar pole of Sbb Sa +
with a residue matrix of zero signature, for this residue matrix is the direct
sum of Ti with the residue matrix of (2) which is -2oqei lr, of identical rank
and opposite definiteness. Moreover, Sa given by (88) is real with Saa, since
all <l>i are then real, whereas <po is real since all complex Pi then occur in
conjugate pairs.
34. The above procedure gives a solution, but the dimension of Sa is rather
large since it is constructed as a direct sum, and we now investigate how it
can be decreased by contraction. For real matrices, two conjugate factors
of (86) form the real fraction
+
(p oci)2 + wt (89)
(p - oci)2 + w;
which is positive definite on the whole real p-axis (since it is positive at p = 0
and p = oo and has neither zeros nor poles on the axis). Consequently, the
factors of <po can be distributed arbitrarily between the <l>i without altering
the signs of the residue matrices at the real poles.
We are thus led to consider the following problem: find the smallest
dimension kfor which a symmetric para-unitary matrix Sb exists which has given simple
poles of type (b) of given degrees Ti and residue matrices of appropriate definiteness
(opposed to ei), Once an Sb is found, an Sa of the same minimum dimension
! is Sa = Sb Sc where Sc is a diagonal matrix of dimension k of determinant (86)
where the factors (89) composing (86) are distributed arbitrarily between the
diagonal entries of Sc. In order to be perfectly general, we will not assume a
priori that the Sb of minimal dimension k are diagonal, but we will find in
fact that diagonal matrices of dimension k do exist.
35. Let oc1 < <X2 < · · · < oc 8 be the various poles of type (b). The matrix Sb
must have these poles with the same degrees (rt··· ra) and no others. The
denominator of det Sb is thus TI (p - oci}r' and, since Sb is para-unitary, the
numerator of det S is ±TI (p + oci}r', so it does not vanish on the positive
p-axis. Since Sb is thus nonsingular on the positive p-axis, and real symmetric
on this axis, its eigenvalues are real and all different from zero at every point
of the positive p-axis other than the oci, thus the signature of Sb is constant
Symmetric solutions of minimum degree 383
between two consecutive CXi • In the neighborhood of any °'i, the principal
value of S11 must be the one of the corresponding <l>i defined by (87), since
+
this is the condition for compensation of the pole CXi in S1111 S11. Since for
p < ext , , has rank ri and the definiteness of Bi , and since all ri nonzero
entries change sign for p > CXi, the signature of ,, hence of S11, decreases by
2s, ri when p passes CXi by increasing values. Let ao denote the signature of
S11 at p = 0 and a, its signature between ex, and cxH1; one has
(90)
and the signature of S11, as a discrete function of p, can be computed by
recurrence from ao for every realp up to some value aoo at infinity. With the
notations
i
qo=0; ... , q,= LBmrm; ... , (91)
m=l
(90) gives
(i=O, 1, ... ,s) (92)
and aoo is a8 • Since the signature of a matrix of dimension k is at most k and
at least -k, one must have
amax <k (93)

hence
(94)
By (92), one has
(95)
and (94) then gives
(96)
and this fixes the minimum dimension k. The equality (96) can only be
reached if the equalities are reached simultaneously in both conditions (93).
With amax = k, the second relation (95) gives
ao=k +2qmin (97)
Since one may deduce qmin and qmax from the list (91), k is determined by the
equality case of (96), and ao is then computed by (97). All the a, can then be
computed by (92). Finally the minimum dimension of S11 and its signature pattern
(including the values ao and aoo) are uniquely determined by the values et and
r,, that is, by the basic solution.
36. Since (89) is + 1 both at p = 0 and p = oo, the signatures ao and aoo are
not altered in the product Sa = S11 Sc. The signature of any symmetric solu-
tion of minimum dimension is the sum of the above values with the signatures
of the basic solution, since a symmetric all-pass transformation (which is real

orthogonal for p = 0 and p = oo) does not alter the signatures. Finally, the
signature at p = 0 and the signature at p = oo are invariants for all real symmetric
solutions of minimum dimension.
37. It remains to show that one can construct a diagonal matrix Sb of the minimum
dimension k having the appropriate poles and the discrete signature function previously
determined. We start with a diagonal matrix of dimension k composed of
entries ± 1 in appropriate numbers to have the signature a 0 but otherwise
arbitrary. We next multiply some r1 entries of the matrix by (ex1 + p)/(ex1 -p)
and choose r1 positive entries if e1 = +l, but r1 negative entries if e1 = -1.
Since the factor (ex1 + p)/(ex1 -p) is positive for p = 0, the signature a 0 has
not been altered. Since the new matrix has the appropriate residue matrix at
ex1 its signature for p > ex1 has become a1 = ao - 2e1r1, and since k has been
chosen to satisfy (94), there were enough positive or negative entries initially
to allow the modification of r1 of them. The process is continued by intro-
ducing factors (ext + p) (ext - p) at ex2, exa, ..•• Since all factors are positive
for p <ext, the earlier signatures are unaltered, whereas the known value of
the new signature determines the distribution of the last inserted factor
among the diagonal entries obtained at the previous stage. The diagonal
matrix thus obtained has dimension k, the right poles, residues, and signa-
tures, and is para-unitary, since all factors are para-unitary.
38. Even if Sb is not of the minimal dimension kmin, its signature pattern is
determined by recurrence from ao by (90). Consequently, the difference
a 00 - ao is invariant for all Sb, and this also holds for the same difference for
S +Sb, since S is uniquely determined by the prescribed Saa. By (8.81 ),
,\ -y is, therefore, invariant in all realizations of a reciprocal n-port for which
the total number of reactive elements ,\ +y is minimum. Consequently, ,\
and y are separately invariant, and in all realizations of a passive reciprocal
n-port using the minimum total number of reactive elements, the number of inductances
and the number of capacitances are separately invariant.
appendix A
Matrix algebra
Terminology and notations

I, In this appendix all classical results of matrix algebra used throughout
the book are assembled for convenient reference. The reader is assumed to
be familiar with arithmetic operations on matrices and determinants, and
with the concept of linear independence. Some elementary theorems just
above that level, which are needed for further reference, are stated without
proof.l Proofs are given, or at least sketched, whenever they are of importance
for network applications. In the theory of canonic forms, special cases are
considered in greater detail than in traditional presentations.
2. A rectangular matrix A= llatill ofn rows and m columns is a (n·m)-matrix.

The numbers n and m are its dimensions. 2 The real or complex numbers aii,
also sometimes noted Ati in technical applications, are its entries.a If m = n,
the matrix is square of dimension n. The transpose of A is noted A'. An (n·l)-
matrix is an n-vector (column-vector). A column-vector is always denoted by a
lowercase symbol such as v, and its entries are Vi. A row-vector is always
denoted as a transpose column-vector, thus v'. A diagonal matrix~ of entries
a,i = S,, aiJ = 0 (i -=I- j) is noted
~ = diag {81, 82, ... , Sn}
The unit matrix of dimension n is noted 1n . The zero matrix of dimensions
n · m is noted On, m, but the subscripts are omitted in obvious cases.
3, The conjugate of a complex number a is noted a* ; the real and imaginary

parts of a are noted Re a and Im a. The conjugate of A is noted A*. A square
385
386 appendix A: Matrix algebra
matrix A is symmetric if A= A', skew if A= -A'. The conjugate transpose of A

Ii
I,
I
is noted A= A'*. A square matrix is hermitian if A= A, skew-hermitian if
A= -A. The determinant of a square matrix A is noted det A. The matrix
A is singular if det A= 0, nonsingular otherwise. If A is nonsingular, it has
an inverse A-1.
4. Let f (x) denote a polynomial, for instance 3x2 + 4x + 5. The notation

f(A) where A is square of dimension n is to be interpreted as 3A 2 + 4A + 51 11 •
Although matrix multiplication is generally not commutative, it is commuta-
tive for square matrices which are all entire functions of a single square-
matrix: if f and g are two polynomials, one has f(A)g(A) = g(A)f(A) for
all f, g, A. Consequently, the notation f (A) can be extended to rational
functions: iff = n/d, one hasf(A) = n(A)[d(A)]- 1 = [d(A)]-ln(A).
j i Partitioned matrices
5. We often consider partitioned matrices, the dimensions of the sub-
matrices being indicated as in
(m -s)
'i
.''I Aocp] (t)

App (n -t)
(1)
whenever necessary. The set of rows (columns) identified by some subscript

(oc or fJ in the above example) is called a matrix row (matrix column). For
instance, the top matrix row of (1) is [Aococ, Aocp]; the comma in the last
expression is used to avoid confusion with the product Aococ Aocp. The direct
sum of two matrices is noted
A+B= [g ~]
6. Let A be nonsingular and partitioned as in ( 1) with m = n, s = t. A parti-
tioned form ef the inverse B = A- 1 is
B= = (A .... - A"'13 A~1 A13"')- 1 (2)
B13"' = -A~l A13"'(A"'"'-A"'13Aii/ A13J-l (3)
B1313 = (A1313 - A13"' A~ i A"'13)-1 (4)
Bcz/3 = -A,;.1 A"'13(A1313 -A13"'A,;;.1 A"'13)- 1 (5)
provided the submatrices to be inverted are nonsingular. This is proved by
writing
Bocp] = [ls (6)
Bpp 0
Theorems on determinants 387
in terms of submatrices. Two of the equations are

AaaBaa +AapBpa = ls
Apa Baa+ AppBpa = 0
The second equation gives
(7)
Bringing (7) into the first equation, one obtains an equation in the single
unknown Baa whose solution is (2). Then (7) yields (3). Results (4-5) are
similarly deduced from the other two equations contained in (6).
7. The inverse of
(8)
is the same matrix with P replaced by -P. The product of two matrices of
the type (8) with submatrices Pa and Pb is of the same type with P =Pa +Pb.
Hence matrices of type (8) form a multiplicative group. When ( l) is post-
multiplied by (8), the result is
AU= [Aaa (9)

Apa
so the effect of the operation is
col fJ-+ col fJ + (col a)P (10)
8. Matrices of the type 18 +

Q with Q nonsingular form a multiplicative
group. The product of a matrix of this type, by (8), gives a matrix of the
form
~] ( 11)
Matrices of the form ( 11) will be called Howitt matrices4 and also form a
multiplicative group. The inverse of ( 11) is
-PQ-1]
Q-1 (12)
Theorems on determinants
9. Let /Xi ( i = l , 2, ... , r) be some selection of r rows of a (rectangular)
matrix A and flt some selection of r columns. The determinant of the resulting
square submatrix is a minor of dimension r ·of A. When multiplied by ( -1 )a,
where a = L( +
rxt f3t), it becomes a signed minor or cofactor of A. If bif denotes
the cofactor of dimension n - I complementary to the entry aif of a square
matrix A, the matrix B = llh1tll is the adjoint of A and is noted adj A. One
has
A- 1 = adj A/det A (13)
(note the transposition in the definition of B).
10. Let A, square of dimension n, be partitioned

(n)
A-- [B]C (r)(n -r) ( 14)
The Laplace expansion of det A based on this partition is

det A= L btCt
where the sum is extended to all minors ht of dimension r of B taken with
the complementary cofactors Ci ( of dimension n - r) of C.
11. Jacobi's theorem on adjoint determinants: a minor of dimension r of adj A is

(det A)'- 1 times the complementary cofactor (of dimension n - r) of A.
12. If A and B are square,
det [~ ~] = det A det B
A matrix (even rectangular) is upper-triangular if all entries below the main

diagonal are zero. The determinant of a square upper-triangular matrix is
the product of its diagonal entries. Since det A' = det A, similar results hold
for lower-triangular matrices. Nonsingular upper-triangular matrices form
a multiplicative group. A square upper-triangular matrix with unit diagonal
entries will be called a Gauss matrix. 5 Gauss matrices have unit determinants
and form a multiplicative group. A product of square matrices of type (8),
even with different partitions, yields a Gauss matrix.
13. Let A be an (n·m)-matrix and Ban (m·n)-matrix, so that AB is square

of dimension n. One has
form <n
det (AB)= (det }det B form= n
L at ht form >n
where the sum is extended to all minors at of dimension n of A taken with
the corresponding minors ht of dimension n of B (same selections in the
I:
Li
Rank 389
columns of A and rows of B). The case m > n is known as the Binet-Cauchy
theorem.
+
14. For A and B square of dimension n, det (A B) is the sum of all 2n
determinants formed by some columns of A with the complementary columns
of B. When this rule is applied to the computation of det (,\1 n -A), each
partial determinant taking s columns of -A and n - s columns of ,\In is
,\n-s multiplied by a principal minor of dimensions of -A, that is, ( -1 )8 ,\n-s
times a principal minor of A. This proves
det (,\1 n -A) = ,\n - S1,\n-l + S 2 ,\n-2 + · · ·+ (-1 )nSn (15)
where the coefficient S8 of ,\n-s is the sum of all principal minors of dimension
s of A. In particular S1 = an +
a22 + · ··+
ann is the trace of A (to be noted
tr A), and Sn is det A.
Rank
15. In this section, A designates an (n·m)-matrix. If A has at least one non-
+
zero minor of dimension r but no such minor of dimension r 1, A has rank r.
A matrix of rank r has exactly r linearly independent row-vectors and column-
vectors. One has r < m and r:::;; n. Consequently,
rank (A + B) :::;; rank A + rank B (16)
The rank of a matrix is not modified if it is pre- or postmultiplied by a non-
singular matrix. If the multiplier matrix is singular, the rank may decrease.
16. By suitable row permutations on one hand and column permutations

on the other (an operation to be called relabeling in the following), it is possible
to bring one of the nonzero minors of dimension r into the top left-hand
corner. This defines the partition
(r) (m - r)
(r)
( 17)
(n -r)
and A_;;; 1 exists. Set
P= -A_;;; 1 Aap (18)
By (9), all entries of the submatrix 1Xf3 of AU, where U is (8) withs= r, are
reduced to zero. All entries of the submatrix {3{3 in AU are then also zero,
since otherwise one could border Aaa in AU to obtain a nonzero minor of
dimension >r. This shows that (9) reduces to
AU=[~:: ~]
Postmultiplying by U-1 , one obtains
~] [ci -P ]
lm-r
= [A°'
Apa
°'] [Ir, -P]
With the notation
Q= -A.a"A~1 (19)
this is equivalent to
A= [ -~]Aaa[Ir, -P] (20)
[ Aaa -AaaP] (21)

= -QAaa QAaaP
which can also be written
A= [ Ir
-Q
0 ][ Aaa
In-r 0 ~] [ci -P ]
Im-r
(22)
or
A= [ Ir
-Q
0 ] [ Aaa
In-r 0
0 ][Ir
In-r 0 -iJ (23)
17. An (n ·m)-matrix contains nm entries. If r < n or r < m, they are not all
independent. The number of independent entries is deduced from (21)
where the number of entries of Q, Aaa, and Pare r(n - r), r 2, and r(m - r),
respectively. The total is r(n + m - r) and is the number of independent
entries of A. For a square matrix, the result is r(2n - r).
18. If r = I in (20), Aaa reduces to a scalar, [Ir, -P] becomes a row-vector

to be noted v', whereas the column matrix formed by Ir and -Q becomes
a column-vector u. Since the scalar Aaa can be incorporated into v' or u, or
partially in both, a matrix of rank I is of the form
A=uv' (24)
This form is true even without preliminary relabeling, since such an opera-
tion merely permutes the entries of u on one hand, and the entries of v' on
the other, among themselves. Note that, in (24), u is an n-vector and v an
m-vector. Conversely, a matrix of the form (24) has rank I: its entries are
aii = u, VJ so that all minors of dimension 2 (hence of higher dimension)
vanish.
Rank 391
19. The matrix D, whose entries 6 are all minors dpq of dimension r of a
matrix A of rank r, has rank 1.
Proof: The minor dpq is the determinant of a submatrix of A obtained
by taking some set p of r rows and some set q of columns. In (20) one must
take some r columns of the matrix factor [Ir, -P], and this reduces it to a
square submatrix Bq of dimension r, where the subscript q depends on the
column selection. Similarly, the first matrix factor is reduced, by the selec-
tion of the set p of rows, to a square submatrix Gp. One then has dpq = det Gp
det Aacac det Bq = cp abq. Hence D = acb' which is of the form (24).
20. A hermitian matrix of dimension n and of rank I is of the form

A=±uu (25)
where u is an n-vector.
Proof: By 18, A is of the form (24), hence au = Ui VJ, and at least one
entry Ui is nonzero; otherwise all atf vanish and A has rank 0. The definition
..
of a h erm1tian matnx . gives
. * h ence ui vj = uj**
aij = aji, vi . A ssummg
. ui cf= 0 ,
one has vj = uj (v7 /ui) for all i, J. The ratio v7 /ui is thus a constant k, and one
has vj = kuj , or v = ku*. Then (24) gives A = kuu. For a diagonal entry this
gives aii = kui u7 and, since a! = aii for a hermitian matrix, k is real. With
k = ± h2 and the replacement of u by hu, one obtains (25).
21, A hermitian matrix of rank r has at least one nonzero principal minor
of dimension r.
Proof: The theorem is true for a matrix of rank I, for (25) gives
aii = ±u; c/= 0 for at least one ui cf= 0. For a matrix A of rank r, one forms
the matrix D as in 19, which is hermitian with A if the same labeling is
adopted for the sets p and q of rows and columns. D is then hermitian of
rank I and has at least one nonzero diagonal entry, which is a principal
minor of dimension r of A.
22, Let Aaac designate a nonzero principal minor of dimension r of a hermi-

tian matrix A of dimension n and rank r. By a symmetric relabeling (identical
permutations on the rows and the columns), A can be brought into the form
(17) where m = n, and (17) remains hermitian. Forms (20-23) follow and are
also hermitian. In (21), it is clear that Aaac is hermitian and that Q = P.
Consequently, after symmetric relabeling, a hermitian matrix of rank r takes
the forms
A-[ Aacac (26)

- -I'Aacac
the last form being deduced from (22) and (8).
23. A nonsingular hermitian matrix of dimension n has n real diagonal

entries and n(n - I) /2 independent off-diagonal complex entries; this makes
a total of n2 real parameters. For a hermitian matrix of rank r, the inde-
pendent parameters are the ones of Acxcx and Pin (26). Acxcx is hermitian of
dimension r, and contains r 2 real parameters. Pis general complex of dimen-
sions r · (n - r) and contains 2r(n - r) parameters. A hermitian n-matrix of
rank r thus depends on r(2n - r) parameters.
+
24. A real symmetric matrix of dimension n contains n(n 1)/2 distinct
entries. For a real symmetric matrix of rank r, the above computation based
+ +
on (26) with Acxcx and P real gives, similarly, r(r 1)/2 r(n -r), hence a
+
total of r(2n - r I) /2 parameters.
25. The main results of 17, 23, and 24 are summarized in the following
table. The table gives the number of real parameters for a square matrix
of dimension n and rank r of various types.
general complex 2r(2n -r)
general real r(2n -r)
hermitian r(2n -r)
real symmetric r(2n -r + 1)/2
26. For a hermitian matrix of rank 1, the above formula gives 2n - 1 real
parameters. In the form (25) of such a matrix the n-vector u has n complex
entries, hence 2n real parameters, but one real parameter is arbitrary since
a common phase factor ei<P can be introduced in all entries of u, and its
conjugate in u. For a real symmetric matrix of rank 1, the number of real
parameters is n, and these are the n entries of the real vector u in (25),
which becomes A= ±uu' in the real case.
Linear equations
27. Consider the homogeneous linear system
Ax=O (27)
'I where xis an m-vector. System (27) and Bx= 0 are equivalent (have identical
solutions x) if B = TA with T nonsingular of dimension n. The matrices A
and B = TA are then called left-equivalent. Since the first two matrix factors
in the right-hand member of (23) are nonsingular, any (n·m)-matrix of
,I
I rank r is left-equivalent, after relabeling, to its normal form
p (r) (m -r)
IiI
[~ -PJ 0
(r)
(n -r)
(28)
'
l
Congruence transformations of hermitian matrices 393
This form is unique, for a given labeling, but different normal forms may
be obtained if A has several nonzero minors of dimension r susceptible of
playing the role of Aococ in (17).
28. If the vector x is partitioned into the vectors Xoc and xp, of rand m - r
entries, respectively, the system (27) becomes equivalent, after relabeling
of the entries of x, to
or
Xoc=Pxp (29)
The xp are arbitrary, whereas the Xoc depend on the xp by (29). Consequently,
system (27) where A is an (n · m)-matrix of rank r has m - r linearly inde-
pendent solutions. The number m - r is the nullity 7 of A. In the case of a
square matrix A of dimension n, the existence of at least one nonzero solution
x requires r < n, hence det A = 0.
29. The nonhomogeneous system

Ax=y (30)
is compatible if
rank [A,y] = rank A (31)
and incompatible otherwise. In the latter case the rank of the bordered
+
matrix [A, y] is 1 rank A.
Congruence transformations of hermitian matrices

30. Any square matrix A is uniquely expressible as
(32)
with B symmetric and C skew. This is obtained by setting
B =(A+ A')/2; C= (A -A)'/2 (33)
Consider the scalar
f = x' Ax = L aii Xi XJ (34)
i, j
Since x'Cx vanishes for any vector x and any skew matrix C, f reduces to
x'Bx and is called the quadratic form associated to the symmetric matrix B.
By the transformation
x=Ty (35)
the scalar (34) becomes a form of matrix T' AT, called the congruent transform
of A by T. Nonsingular congruence transformations form a group. The
'I
I'
congruent transform of a (skew) symmetric matrix is (skew) symmetric.
i
31. For any square matrix one can write
A=B+jC (36)
with Band C both hermitian. This is obtained by setting
B = (A +A)/2; jC= (A -.A)/2 (37)
Consider the scalar
f=xAx (38)
Its real part is xBx and its imaginary part xCx. Both expressions are hermitian
forms, associated to the hermitian matrices B and C, respectively. By (35),
(38) becomes x( 1'A T)x, and 1'AT is called the conjunctive transform of A by
T. Nonsingular conjunctive transformations form a group. The conjunctive
transform of a (skew-)hermitian matrix is (skew-)hermitian.
32. In 33-43, A will denote a hermitian matrix of dimension n, and we will

study its conjunctive transformations. The theory of real congruence trans-
formations of real symmetric matrices is then obtained as a particular case by
i restricting all matrices to be real. Complex symmetric matrices will not be
I'
:i considered.
33. A scalar a is positive if a> 0, it is strictly positive if a > 0. A quadratic or

hermitian form A is positive definite (to be written A> 0) if the associated
form is such that f > 0 for all x. If, in addition, f only vanishes for x = 0,
the matrix is strictly positive definite 8 (to be written A> 0). The rank of a form
I f is the rank of its matrix A. A positive definite matrix is strictly p.d. if it is
.I
'I
nonsingular. (Strict) positive definiteness is invariant by nonsingular con-
ii junctive transformations. Since xx> for all x =fa 0, one has 1n > 0, hence
'r
1'T > 0 for all nonsingular T, and TT> 0 for all T. A principal submatrix
of a (strictly) p.d. matrix is (strictly) p.d.; in particular all diagonal entries
are (strictly) p.d.
34. The Gauss algorithm. A nonsingular hermitian p.d. matrix can be con-
' ~ junctively transformed into a diagonal form ~ by
(39)
1
,,(1
l where Tis a Gauss matrix (defined in 12).
'l Proof: Let A be partitioned
l
(n -1)
u] (1)
App (n-1)
where u is an (n - 1)-vector and a11 > 0. With
-fl/au] (40)
ln-1
which is of the form (8) and constructed in accordance with (18), one
reduces to zero all entries, except the first one, in the first row of A Ti,
without altering a11. Since 1'1A Ti is hermitian, it also has symmetrically
placed zero entries in the first column, and thus reduces to a direct sum
+
a 11 A1 where A1 is nonsingular hermitian p.d. of dimension n - 1. This
remark, and the group property of Gauss matrices proves that if the theorem
is true for A1 of dimension n - 1, it is true for A of dimension n. Since the
theorem is trivial for n = 1, it is proved by induction.
35. Designate by M1, M2, Ma the top left-hand corner principal minors of
A of dimensions 1, 2, 3, ... as shown below:
au\ a12 a13

a21 a22 a23
(41)
Since det T = I in (39), one has

det A= Mn= det ~ = 0102 · · · on
The same result applied to the submatrix of A whose determinant is Mn-l
gives
Mn-l = 0102 · · · On-l
hence On= Mn/Mn-l and, by induction, with Mo= 1,
(p = 1, 2, ... , n) (42)
Let Mp,q designate the minor Mp-1 bordered by row p and column q of A,
with q > p, otherwise Mp,q = 0. For instance,
a11 a12 a17 i
i
Ma, 7 = _a21 ____ a22 a27 (43)
a31 a32 a37
where the principal minor is M2. In (39), the minor (43) is the product ofa
principal minor of 1' which is 1, by the minor Ma = 0102 03 of ~, by a
minor similar to (43) of T. The latter is upper-triangular and is the product
of its diagonal entries, hence equal to t37 which is the only such entry -=f- l.
Finally, one has Ma, 7 = Ma t37 or, more generally,
for allp < q (44)
Since Mp,p = Mp, one obtains correctly lpp = 1.
36. Formulas (42) and (44) give explicit expressions for the entries of the
Gauss diagonal form A of A and for the coefficients of the conjunctive
transformation T leading to it. This proves that the Gauss diagonal form
is unique. Moreover, A is strictly positive definite with A, and the positive-
ness of A is equivalent to Sp> 0 for all p, hence by (42) to Mp> 0 for all
p. Finally a hermitian matrix is strictly positive definite if all n imbedded
principal minors of increasing dimension defined in (41) are strictly positive.
Since a symmetric relabeling is a conjunctive transformation, other diagonal
forms can be obtained after such a relabeling. As a consequence, all principal
minors of all dimensions of a strictly p.d. hermitian matrix are strictly
positive. Finally, the number ofnontrivial entries ( :;i=0, :;i= l) of Tis n(n - l) /2;
these are complex and give n(n - l) real parameters. On the other hand,
A is real and has n parameters. The total number of real parameters in
(39) is thus n2 as in the nonsingular hermitian matrix A, so the representa-
tion (39) is nonredundant. A similar result holds in the real symmetric case.
37. Since (26) defines a congruence transformation by a Gauss matrix, the

Gauss algorithm can be generalized to singular p.d. hermitian matrices of
! ; rank r: relation (39) still holds, but A is of the form Ar+ 0n-r. The form,
however, is generally not unique, for the symmetric relabeling preliminary
to (26) is not unique. One easily checks that the final representation is also
ii
i l nonredundant, the total number of parameters being that of 25. Also, A
is positive definite if Ar is strictly positive definite, and this is equivalent to
the strict positiveness of some sequence of r imbedded principal minors of A
of dimensions l, 2, ... , r. We further prove that a p.d. hermitian matrix
of rank r is a sum of r p.d. hermitian matrices of rank l. Denote by t, the ith
I l column of 1' in (39) and by 13, the ith entry of Ar. One has A= t1Si't1 +
+ ···
t2 13 272 tr Srtr, and each term of this sum is hermitian p.d. of rank l.
38. A hermitian p.d. matrix of dimension n and rank r can be reduced to

lr + 0n-r by a conjunctive transformation.
''t Proof: In (39), A is Ar+ 0n-r, and Ar is strictly positive definite.
Denote by A:1 2 the positive square root of A,, that is, the diagonal matrix
whose entries are the positive square roots of the entries of Ar. With S =
(A:1 2 + ln_,) T, one then has A= S(l, + 0n_,)S.
39. As an application, a real symmetric matrix of dimension 2 is strictly

p.d. iff au > 0, det A > 0. The only other principal minor is a22 and is
automatically strictly positive. If det A = 0, and A has rank 1, at least one
diagonal entry is nonzero; if au :;i= 0, A is positive definite iff an > 0, and
a 22 > 0 results. Note, however, that the conditions an> 0, det A> 0,
although necessary in all cases, are insufficient when au= 0, det A= 0, since
the sign of a22 is then arbitrary. For au =I= 0, the transformation matrix is
T= [t (45)
and the diagonal entries are

81 = an; 82 = det A/a11 (46)
40. If a diagonal entry is zero in a hermitian p.d. matrix, the corresponding

row (and column) contains only zero entries: the principal minor aii aii -
aij at is strictly negative for aii = 0, unless aij = 0 for all j.
41. The Gauss algorithm also works for hermitian matrices which are not
p.d. with the following modification which is necessary if au = 0 in (40),
after all possible symmetric relabelings. This means that all aii are zero.
Then some aij =I= 0 exists, otherwise all elements are zero and the matrix is
already diagonal. By a symmetric relabeling, one can make 12 = 1 =I= 0. a at
With a12 = mei, one has
[ me~i</> mi"']= [t ~][t

e-~</>] [~ e~<f>] (47)
[~ m]=i[ 0 2 -1
1 !][-~ ~][! -!J (48)
The product of the conjunctive transformation matrices occurring In (47)

and (48) is
U= J2 I
1 [I
-!l[t 0]
ei =Ji 1 [I
I
-e-i</>]
ei</> (49)
Consequently, the conjunctive transformation by U +

I n-r produces a
matrix with two nonzero diagonal entries ±m to which the original Gauss
algorithm applies again. Due to this modification, the final transformation
matrix Tis generally not a Gauss matrix, but the result is still (39) with ~
diagonal of rank r = rank A.
42. In general, a hermitian matrix A can be conjunctively transformed into

a diagonal matrix in accordance with (39) in many ways, and neither T
nor ~ are unique (the original Gauss algorithm was characterized by the
upper-triangular form of T, but this restriction is now abandoned). Let ~
and A denote two diagonal transforms of the same hermitian matrix A.
The law of inertia of Sylvester states that ~ and A have identical numbers of
strictly positive, strictly negative, and zero entries, respectively. By the
group property of conjunctive transformations, one has A= 1'!!.. T with

some nonsingular T. The hermitian form jAy is then j'l'I:!.. Ty= xl:!..x by 31,
and this means
(50)
Let the number of strictly positive entries p of A and q of I:!,. be different, and
assume, for instance, p < q. Set equal to zero the p entries Yi associated with
strictly positive Ai and the n - q entries Xi associated with the negative Di.
+
This gives a total of p n - q < n linear conditions in (35) and is possible
with x =I= 0, y =I= 0. Since the two sides of (50) are nonzero with different
signs, one has proved p = q ab absurdo. The same proof holds for the strictly
negative entries.
43. Let n+, n-, and no denote the number of positive, negative, and zero
entries in any diagonal form of A. The total number of nonzero entries is
the rank of A
+
n+ n- = r = n - no
so that no is the nullity. The difference
a =n+ -n-
is called the signature of A. Conversely, the numbers n+ and n_ are deduced
from rand a by
n+= (r+a)/2; n-=(r-a)/2 (51)
44. A real skew matrix cannot be diagonalized by a real congruence trans-

formation, since a diagonal matrix is symmetric, and symmetry is invariant
I by congruence. It is true thatjA is hermitian if A is real skew, and can then
be diagonalized by a complex conjunctive transformation, but this is of no
:i direct help in the real domain. Just as a real scalar is the simplest case of a
real symmetric matrix, so the matrix
~] (52)
with S real, is the simplest case of a real skew matrix. This suggests to look
for a congruence transformation into a direct sum of blocks of type (52), to
be called gyrator blocks9 for the sake of brevity.
45. A real skew matrix A of dimension n and rank r (necessarily even) can
be represented as
A=T'l:!..T (53)
where Tis real and
I:!..= l:!..r+ 0n-r (54)
where l:!..r is a direct sum r/2 gyrator blocks.
The proof simulates the Gauss algorithm on blocks of dimension 2. If A

is of rank zero, no transformation is needed. Assume therefore that A has
at least one nonzero entry; by symmetric relabeling, this entry can be
brought into the position a 12 • Let A be partitioned thus:
(n - 2)
Aap] (2) (55)
App (n -2)
where r 1 is of the form (52) with o= a1 2 -=I= 0. Since r 1 1 exists, the matrix
(56)
which is of form (8) and is constructed in accordance with ( 18), reduces to

zero the submatrix ct./3 of AT1. Since T{A T1 is skew, it reduces to a direct
+
sum r1 A1 where A1 is skew of dimension n - 2 and rank r - 2, and the
algorithm can be iterated on this submatrix. The procedure stops when a
matrix of rank zero or dimension 2 is reached, and this proves that the rank
of a skew matrix is even.
46. The matrix (56), hence the product of the transformation matrices at
the various steps, is a Gauss matrix, except for relabelings. One can also
check that the representation (53) is nonredundant. By analogy with 24,
the number of parameters of a real skew matrix of dimension n and rank r is
r(2n - r - l) /2, composed of the r(r - l) /2 parameters of the nonsingular
skew submatrix of dimension rand of the r(n - r) parameters of the matrix
P. In the matrix playing the role of (56) in the reduction step from dimen-
sion i + 2 to dimension i, the submatrix ct./3 has 2i parameters. Since the
process stops for i = n - r, the total number of parameters in Tis
~2-1 ~2-1
L 2(n-r+2k)=2(n-r)r/2+4 L k
k-0 0
= (n - r)r + r(r/2 - l) = r(n - l - r/2)
Adding the r/2 parameters of~, one obtains the announced-t6tal.
47. The simplest nontrivial example is n = 4. One thus has T = T1 and

r 2 = A1 = A~11 r 1 1Aa11 + Ap11. Consequently, for the case n = 4with a12 -=I= 0,
the matrix Tin (53) is
0 a23/a12
l -a13/a12
(57)
0 l
0 0
whereas the parameters of ~ are

(58)
Unitary transformations
48. Consider the linear relationy = Ax with A square of dimension n, where
x and y are submitted to the same nonsingular transformation x = T[,
y = Try. The linear relation becomes 11 = B[ with
B= T-lAT (59)
defining a similarity traniformation of A into B by T. When T- 1 = T', the
transformation is also a congruence. One then has
TT'= T'T= In (60)
and the matrix T and the resulting transformation are called orthogonal.
When T- 1 = 'f, the transformation (59) is also conjunctive. One then has
T'f = T'f= In (61)
and the matrix T and the transformation are called unitary.
49. Let X be any (n·m)-matrix of rank m (this assumes m::::;; n); it is possible
to find a nonsingular matrix M of dimension m such that Y = XM satisfies
YT= Im.
Proof: The requirement is MXXM = Im, or XX =M-lM-1 =
(MM)- 1 . By the Gauss algorithm, the strictly positive matrix XX can be put
in the form T~ T where ~ is diagonal of strictly positive entries, and M =
T-1~- 1/ 2 is a solution; ~- 1/ 2 denotes the positive square root of ~- 1, defined
in 38.
50. Two vectors Xa and Xb are orthogonal if XaXb = 0. A vector Xa has unit
modulus if Xa Xa = 1. A set of vectors is an orthonormal set if they are all of
unit modulus and mutually orthogonal. The column-vectors of a unitary
matrix form an orthonormal set. Call x1c the kth column-vector of X in 49,
and similarly for Y. The relation Y = XM gives
Yi = x1mli + x2 m2i + · · · + Xm mmi
and shows that the vectors y1c are linear combinations of the vectors x1c.
Consequently, the process 49 has transformed a set of m linearly indepen-
dent vectors (since X had rank m) into an orthonormal set. This interpreta-
tion of 49 is called the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process.
51. Let X be nonsingular; it is possible to find a unitary matrix U such that

UX is upper-triangular.
-------------------~~========---------=-----
Unitary transformations 401
Proof: In 49, one has Y = XM = XT- 1!)._- 112 with Y unitary and T
upper-triangular. This gives YX = D.. 112 T which is upper-triangular. Hence
U = Y is a solution.
52. We investigate the possibility of transforming a square matrix A into a

diagonal matrix A by a similarity transformation. The condition
T-lAT=A (62)
is equivalent to
AT=TA (63)
Let x be the kth column of T and ,\ the kth diagonal entry of A. Equation
(63) reduced to these elements is Ax= ,\x or
(A - ,\ln)x = 0 (64)
It has a nonzero solution x iff ,\ satisfies the characteristic equation
det (A - ,\In)= 0 (65)
The n roots of (65) are called the eigenvalues of A. To each eigenvalue At
corresponds at least one eigenvector solution of (64) where,\= At; the number
oflinearly independent eigenvectors associated to At is the nullity of A - At In.
The multiplicity of At as a root of (65) is the algebraic nullity of ,\i; the nullity
of A - ,\i In is the geometric nullity. By (15), the sum of the eigenvalues is
tr A and their product is det A.
53. Let ai and gi denote the algebraic and geometric nullities of ,\i. One
has I ~ gt ~ at .
Proof: The part gi > I is trivial, since det (A - ,\i In) = 0 by the
definition of an eigenvalue. To prove the second part, replace ,\ by ,\ - At in
(15) and apply (15) to the matrix B=A-,\iln whose sums of principal
minors of dimension s are noted Ts . One has
Since gi is the nullity of B, all minors of dimension larger than n - gi vanish,

hence the last gi coefficients Ts in (66). This shows that ,\ = ,\i is a zero
of multiplicity gi at least of (66), hence at> gi.
54. Eigenvectors associated to distinct eigenvalues are linearly independent.

Proof: Since (64) is a linear system in x, a linear combination of
eigenvectors associated to a common eigenvalue is also an eigenvector for
the same eigenvalue. It is, therefore, sufficient to prove that the same eigen-
vector x cannot belong to two distinct eigenvalues A1 and ,\z . But this is
obvious, for Ax= A1x and Ax= A2 x requires (.\1 - A2)x = 0 which is impos-
sible with x =I- 0 for .\1 =I- A2 .
55. By 53 and 54, the total number of linearly independent eigenvectors is

L gi, whereas one has L lli = n. Since a nonsingular Tin (62) only exists
if its columns can be formed by n independent eigenvectors, the diagonaliza-
tion by similarity is only possible for I gi = n. By 53, this requires ai = gt
for every i. Matrices for which this condition is not satisfied are defective. The
simplest example of a defective matrix is
(67)
whose characteristic equation is ,\ 2 = 0, so that the algebraic nullity of the

eigenvalue O is 2, whereas its geometric nullity is the nullity of (67) which
is 1. A matrix having only distinct eigenvalues is nondefective: from ai = I
for all i and 53, one deduces gi = I = at.
56. Letf(.\) be the polynomial (15). Since

(Mn -A) adj (Aln -A) =f(,\) · In
is a polynomial identity in .\, it holds when ,\ is replaced by A. Since the
left-hand side then vanishes, one has f(A) = 0. This is the Cayley-Hamilton
theorem: every matrix satisfies its own characteristic equation. The expression
f(A) = 0 is to be interpreted in accordance with 4.
57. All eigenvalues of a hermitian matrix are real: from Ax = .\x premulti-
plied by x, subtract its conjugate transpose xAx = .\*xx to yield (,\ - .\*)xx=
0, thus ,\ = ,\ *. If A is hermitian, any two eigenvectors x1 and x2 associated
to two distinct eigenvalues .\1 and .\2 are orthogonal, i.e., satisfy x1x 2 = 0:
from Ax1 = .\1x1 premultiplied by x2, subtract Ax2 = .\2 x2 premultiplied by
x1 to yield (.\1 - .\2)x1x2 = 0.
58. Since the eigenvectors contain an arbitrary complex multiplier, as solu-

tions of the homogeneous system (64), they can be normalized to satisfy
xx = I. If all n eigenvalues are simple, a set of n orthogonal eigenvectors is
available, and they form the columns of a unitary matrix T, so the problem
of representing a hermitian matrix in the form
A=TAT (68)
with T unitary and A diagonal has a unique solution within relabeling, when
all eigenvalues are distinct: A is the direct sum of the eigenvalues of A, and
the columns of T are the normalized eigenvectors.
59. A hermitian matrix cannot be defective.

Proof: To prove at= gi it is sufficient to show that the coefficient Tr of
subscript r = n - gi in (66) is nonzero. But r is the rank of B = A - At In.
From B, which is hermitian with A since At is real, deduce the matrix D of
all minors of dimension r of B, as in 21. D is hermitian of rank I, hence of
the form (25). Tr is the sum of the principal minors of dimension r of B,
hence the sum of the diagonal entries of D. By (25), this sum is ±~]utl2 -=I- 0,
since at least one Ut is nonzero.
60. In the case of multiple eigenvalues of a hermitian matrix, representation

(68) is still possible, and A is unique but not T. From 59 we know that ai
linearly independent eigenvectors are associated with every eigenvalue of
multiplicity at. From 57 we know that all these eigenvectors are orthogonal
to any eigenvector associated with another eigenvalue. To form the unitary
matrix T of (68), it is sufficient to make the eigenvectors associated with a
multiple eigenvalue orthogonal among themselves, and this is achieved, for
instance, by the Gram-Schmidt process of 50. The matrix T is not unique,
due to the arbitrariness involved in this process.
61. Let A be hermitian and positive definite. Any diagonal form of A pro-
duced by a congruence transformation is then positive, and so, in particular,
is the matrix produced by the unitary transformation 1'AT= A. Set
A= A 1 l 2 where the entries of A are taken positive. The matrix B = 1'A 1 l 2 T
is also hermitian and positive definite. Since B 2 = 1'A 1 /2 TTA 1l2 T = TAT=
A, B is called the hermitian square root of A. We now prove that B is unique,
although Twas not. We have to prove that if C is another hermitian positive
matrix satisfying C 2 = B 2, one has necessarily C = B. Let C = srs be the
unitary transformation of C into a diagonal matrix. Since each entry y of r
is an eigenvalue of C, one has Cx = yx for some vector x, hence, multiplying
by C, C 2x = yCx = y 2x; thus Ax = y 2x, so that y 2 is some eigenvalue A of A;
since y is positive, it is necessarily some eigenvalue 8 = A1 / 2 of B. Conse-
r
quently, one has produced = A, possibly after some symmetric relabeling
which can be accounted for in S. Because C = SAS and B = TAT, the con-
dition C 2 =B 2 reduces to SAS= TAT, or MA=AM, where M= TS.
Since A is diagonal, the condition MA = AM means At mt1 = mtJ AJ, thus
mt1 = 0 for At -=I- AJ and Mis a direct sum Ma,+ Mp+ ... where each sub-
matrix is square of a dimension equal to the multiplicity of the correspond-
ing eigenvalue. Since Mis unitary, as a product of unitary matrices, each
submatrix Ma,, Mp, ... is unitary. Let us now form the product MAM=
8rxMrxMrx + 8pMpMp + · ·· = Drx lrx + Sp Ip+···= A. From this result,
and from the fact that S = MT is also unitary, one deduces C =SAS=
1'(MAM)T= 1'AT=B.
I
1.1
62. Two hermitian matrices A and B, of which one (say A) is strictly positive
i definite, can be diagonalized simultaneously by the same conjunctive trans-
formation.
Proef: Let T be the unitary matrix diagonalizing the hermitian
matrix A- 1!2BA- 112 , where A 112 is the hermitian square root of A, and A- 1 / 2
its inverse. Then A- 112 T diagonalizes A and B, for it transforms A into
1'A- 1 12AA- 112 T= In and B into 1'(A- 1 12BA-I!2) T which is diagonal by
hypothesis.
63. When both hermitian matrices A and Bare singular, the above procedure
fails, but a simultaneous diagonalization by a conjunctive transformation is
possible provided both matrices are positive definite.IO
'ii Proof: Let A have rank r. By a conjunctive transformation, one first
ilI',, reduces A to the form Ir+ Dn-r = D, according to 38. The same transfor-
mation changes B into E, which is still positive definite. Applying an analogue
l,
process to the submatrix of dimension n - r of E lying in the corner opposite
to Ir of D, one transforms this submatrix into a direct sum It+ Os with
s + t = n - r without altering D. At this stage, E has the form
(69)
and since Eyy = 0, all entries of E/7.y and Ey/7. are zero by 40. Neglecting thus
the last s zero rows and columns in both E and D, one considers the matrices
(70)
A conjunctive transformation of type (8) can reduce E17.fJ and EfJ/7. to zero
without altering D. Finally, one diagonalizes E/7.17. by a unitary transformation
which does not alter Ir in D.
64. The eigenvalues of a unitary matrix have unit modulus. From Ax = ,\x
and its conjugate transpose xA = ,\*x, one obtains by multiplication
xAAx = ,\,\*xx, thus ,\,\* = I since AA= l n and xx -=I- 0. In particular, the
eigenvalues of a hermitian unitary matrix (thus in particular of a real
orthogonal matrix) are all ±I; the signature of such a matrix is equal to
its trace.
65. If A is real symmetric, its eigenvectors are real since its eigenvalues are
real. Consequently, Tis real in (68), and any real symmetric matrix can be
transformed into a real diagonal matrix by a real orthogonal transformation.
All the results of 61-64 are similarly extended to real orthogonal matrices.
On the other hand, real skew matrices deserve a particular treatment, as in

44-47.
66. For a real skew matrix A, the reduction (53) to a direct sum of gyrator
blocks is possible by an orthogonal transformation.
Proef: If A is real skew,jA is hermitian and has real eigenvalues. Let,\
be such an eigenvalue and let x (generally complex) be an associated eigen-
vector, so that one hasjAx = ,\x. Since A is real, the conjugate equation shows
that x* is an eigenvector corresponding to -,\. This shows that the eigen-
vectors ofjA can be grouped in pairs, except possibly for the zero eigenvalues
(there is certainly one such eigenvalue at least if A is of odd order) which
have, however, real associated eigenvectors. The diagonal transform ofjA is
consequently of the form diag {,\1, -,\1, A2, -,\2, ... }. Dividing by j, one
obtains
(71)
with
A= A1 +A2 + ... +Ak +0n-2k; Ai= [Jo."i O ]

-j,\i
(72)
Moreover, the first 2k columns of T form conjugate pairs, and the last
2n -k columns are real. For ef, =TT/2, formulas (47-49) reduce to
(73)
with
U= J'il [ll (74)
and (74) is unitary. With m = -j,\1, (73) transforms the first diagonal block
A1 of (72) into a real gyrator block. After this transformation, the transfor-
mation matrix T in (71) is replaced by T( U + I n-2), and U only operates
on the first two columns [x, x*] of T, producing
[x, x*]U = J2[Re x, Im x] (75)
thus making them real. Continuing this process on all nonzero diagonal
blocks of (71), one obtains the announced result, and the final transformation
matrix is entirely real, hence orthogonal.
67. A skew matrix A and a strictly positive definite symmetric matrix B can
be reduced simultaneously to their canonic form by the same congruence
transformation.
Proef: As in the similar treatment of a pair of symmetric matrices in

62, the transformation matrix is B- 1 / 2 S, where B 1 / 2 is the hermitian square
root of B, and where S is the orthogonal matrix reducing the skew matrix
B-2/lAB-1/2 into its canonic form.
68. In contrast with 63, the process does not work when the symmetric
matrix B is positive definite but singular. The reason is that when the form
similar to (69) is reached for the skew-matrix A, one can no longer prove that
all entries of Eay and Eya are zero. If, however, the process of63 is continued
in spite of this, the forms reached by a simultaneous congruence transforma-
tion are Ir + On-r for B and
0
~r
[ l:!.t (76)
-E' 0
for A.
Polynomial matrices
69. A matrix is a (real) constant matrix if its entries are (real) constants. We
now consider (real) polynomials in some indeterminate,\, whose coefficients
are (real) numbers. A manic polynomial has a unit leading coefficient. The
conjugate of a polynomial](,\) = I
ai ,\i is
[f (,\)J* = I af ,\*i (77)

and generally differs from J(,\*), unless all ai are real, that is, unless the
polynomial is real. With the argument omitted, a notation such asf* always
designates (77) and notf(,\*). A (real) polynomial matrix has (real) polynomial
entries. If A is a polynomial matrix, the conjugates in the entries of A* and A
are taken in the sense of (77).
70. If,\ is given some (generally complex) value Ao, A (,\) becomes the con-
stant matrix A(,\o). The rank of A(,\o) is the local rank roof A(,\) at Ao, and
may vary with Ao. The largest value reached by the local rank of A when ,\
varies through the entire complex plane is called the normal rank r of A(,\).
One thus has ro < r, but one can only have ro < r at a finite number of
points (at the zeros in A of certain minors), so one has r0 = r almost everywhere.
For r < n, the square matrix A(A) of dimension n is identically singular.
For r = n, but ro < n, A is locally singular at Ao.
I
'1 71. The inverse of a polynomial matrix is a polynomial matrix only if it is
I: square of constant nonzero determinant, and such a matrix is called uni-
!: modular. An upper-triangular matrix with constant diagonal entries is uni-
·1} modular. Unimodular matrices of dimension n form a multiplicative group.
I
-----------------------------~===~~-~---~--
Polynomial matrices 407
Let A and B denote any (rectangular) polynomial matrices; let P and Q

denote unimodular matrices. If
A=PBQ (78)
A and B are equivalent; if
A=PB (79)
A and B are left-equivalent. If A and B are real polynomial matrices, we also
require P and Q to be real unimodular in the definition of (left-) equivalence.
By 27, a constant matrix is left-equivalent to its normal form (28), within
relabeling. By (22), where Aaa is nonsingular and can be incorporated into
the left or right matrix factor, a constant (m ·n)-matrix ofrank r is equivalent
to Ir f 0n-r,m-r,
72. Any (rectangular) polynomial matrix A is left-equivalent to a matrix B

in which all entries of the first column, except possibly b11, are zero.
Proof: Consider first any two rows i and j of A,
[
ail
.. ·] (80)
a11 ...
and assume that the degree of an is not smaller than the degree of a11 , other-
wise permute rows i andj. Let q and r be the quotient and the remainder of
the division of an by a11, thus
(81)
and premultiply (80) by
(82)
which is obviously unimodular; owing to (81), the entries of the first column
of B = TA have become
bn=r;
so that the degree of bn is strictly smaller than the one of the original entries
an, and a11, whereas the degree of a11 has not changed. In a general matrix
with any number of rows, the above process can be iterated on any pair of
rows, and strictly reduces the degree of some entry of the first column at
every step while leaving unaltered the degrees of all other entries of the first
column. The process only stops after the remainders of the division of some
entry of the first column by all entries of the same column are zero; if there
remains a single nonzero entry, it is then brought into position 11 by row
permutations, and the situation announced in the theorem is reached. The
operations by which this situation is reached are by premultiplication by

unimodular matrices of type (82) or by constant permutation matrices pro-
ducing the required row permutations (no column permutations occur in the
proof), and this ensures left-equivalence.
73. Let a nonincreasing sequence of positive integers rk be defined by re-

currence from ro = n by either (a) rk = rk-1 or (b) rk = rk-1 - l, the option
between (a) and (b) being separately arbitrary for every k, with the exception
that, as soon as rk reaches the value zero, option (a) must be chosen for all
next indices. An (n ·m)-matrix H, in which the last sk entries of column k are
zero is said to be in row-echelon form if the integers Sk can be related to some
sequence of integers rk, as defined above, by the rules Sk > rk for all k, with
particular restriction to Sk = rk for all those k for which rule (b) was used in
the computation of rk.
As an example, the matrix
hu h15 h15
0 h24 h2s h25 h,,l
h27
(83)
0 ha4 has ha6 ha7
0 0 0 0 h47
is in row-echelon form if h11, h2a, h34, and h47 are nonzero, any other entry
being indifferently O or not. The key entries (required to be nonzero) are the
ones before which an echelon actually occurs, and the above mathematical
definition merely states this restriction. The key entries are the leftmost
nonzero entries in every row.
74. Any (real) polynomial matrix is left-equivalent to a (real) row-echelon

matrix.
Proof: Lemma 72 has produced the right form in the first column.
Assuming that the right form has been produced up to column k, we extend
it up to column k + l by applying the lemma to the submatrix formed by
the last rk rows, and, because of the increasing property of the rk, this does
not destroy the zeros produced in the previous columns. The theorem is thus
proved by induction. Since the algorithm involves only rational operations,
its applicability to real polynomial matrices is obvious.
75. A polynomial matrix is said to be in Hermite form if (a) it is row-echelon,

(b) the degree of any key entry is strictly larger that the degree of every entry
of the same column, (c) the key entries are monic. Any (real) polynomial
matrix is left-equivalent to a (real) matrix in Hermite form.
Smith and Jordan forms 409
Proof: By 74, we assume that the matrix is already row-echelon and

prove (b). Let aik be a key entry and let llik be another entry of not smaller
degree above it (i <j). The relevant rows i andj of the matrix are
.. ·] (84)
...
As in 72, let q and r be the quotient and the remainder of the division of aik
by aik. A premultiplication of (84) by (82) changes aik into r, thus reducing
its degree below the one of aik, without altering the pattern of zeros of the
row-echelon form. On the other hand, any key entry is made monic by
multiplying the whole row by a nonzero constant.
76. If a square matrix is not identically singular, its Hermite form is upper-
triangular and unique.
Proof: The upper-triangular form is obvious, for the determinant can
only be nonzero if there is a key entry in every column. The uniqueness will
be proved ab absurdo. Let H and G be two Hermite forms, left-equivalent
to each other by H = TC with T unimodular. Since Hand Gare upper-
triangular, so is T. Since its determinant is constant, so are all its diagonal
entries. Since htt = ftt gii, owing to the upper-traingular character of all
matrices, and since htt and gii are monic, tii = 1. Consider next the entry
h12 = g12 + t12g22. Since deg g12 < deg g22, one has deg h12 > deg g22 if
t12 =I- 0; since deg g22 = deg h22, one deduces deg h12 > deg h22, which con-
tradicts the hypothesis of a Hermite form for H, hence t12 = 0. One similarly
proves by induction ttJ = 0 for all z <j. Finally, Treduces to the unit matrix,
hence H=G.
Smith and Jordan forms

77. A (real) polynomial matrix A of normal rank r is equivalent to a matrix
of identical dimensions whose only nonzero entries are the first r diagonal
entries to be called e1, e2, ... , er; moreover, the et are (real) monic poly-
nomials each dividing the next. One then has
A=PEQ (85)
with P and Q (real) unimodular. Note that if A is an (n·m)-matrix, Pis of
dimension n and Q of dimension m.
Prrof: (a) Apply 72 and denote by a the first column-vector of
A and by
the reduced first column of TA = B. Assume b1 =I- 0, otherwise permute the

columns of A to obtain this. If this is impossible, A = 0 and the theorem is
proved. One thus has Ta= band a= T- 1b. The second equation shows that
b1 is a common divisor of all entries of a, whereas the first equation shows that
every common divisor of the entries of a divides b1; so b1 is the g.c.d. of the
entries of a.
(b) If b1 divides all entries of the first row of B, one subtracts suitable
multiples of the first column from the next columns, to reduce to zero all
entries of the first row except b1. This is equivalent to a right multiplication
by a triangular unimodular matrix and does not destroy the zeros produced
in the first column at the previous step. Consequently, A has been reduced
to the direct sum of b1 with a matrix having one less row and one less column.
(c) If b1 does not divide all entries of the first row of B, we apply the
transpose of the reduction process of step (a). This produces zeros in position
2, 3, ... of the first row but generally destroys the zeros produced in the first
column at the previous step. Since, however, the new g.c.d. is a divisor of b1
[and not b1 itself since otherwise one would be in case (b)] the degree of the
final entry in position (I.I) has strictly decreased. Iterating reductions (a)
and (c) on the first column and the first row, alternatively, the degree of the
entry ( 1.1) decreases at each step until situation (b) arises, and this situation
certainly arises when the degree of the entry ( 1.1) has fallen to zero. Conse-
quently, the direct sum obtained at the end of step (b) is reached in all cases.
(d) One iterates the whole previous process on the submatrices of n - I
rows and m - I columns, n - 2 rows and m - 2 columns, etc. until all rows
or all columns are exhausted or until a submatrix is reached which is identic-
ally zero. In any case, one has obtained A= PtiQ, where the only nonzero
entries of ti are on the main diagonal, and their number is clearly the normal
rank of A.
(e) In the matrix ti, one adds to the first column, all the next columns
(this is a unimodular transformation) to obtain
0 0
...
0
03 ···1
and one repeats step (a). If e1 is the g.c.d. of the o, and T the left unimodular
transformation of step (a), this produces
['..."
t21
ta1
t12
t22
t32
ti3
t23
t33
···r
...
.. .
02
03
02
00
0
0
03
...
· ·1 l''
... -
0
0
t1202
t2202
t3202
t1303
t2303
t2303
. ·1
...
(86)
Since ei is the g.c.d. of the Si, it divides all entries of the first row of (86), and
one is in case (b); (86) is further reduced to the direct sum of ei and of a
matrix Ai whose entries are all divisible by ei.
(f) One repeats the process starting with (a) on Ai, and all entries of
all transforms of Ai remain multiples of e1. After step (e), one thus obtains a
+ +
direct sum ei e2 A2 where ei divides e2, since e2 results from Ai all of
whose elements were multiples of ei. By iteration one obtains the announced
form E.
78. The g.c.d. of all minors of dimension k (k arbitrary) is the same (up to a
scalar factor) for two equivalent matrices A and B.
Proof. By the Binet-Cauchy theorem, every minor of dimension k of A
is a sum of minors of dimension k of B multiplied by minors of P and Q;
consequently, any common divisor of all minors of dimension k of B divides
this sum and, therefore, any minor of dimension k of A. By B = p-iAQ-i
where P and Q are unimodular polynomial matrices, the reasoning holds in
the opposite direction.
79. Let !:::.k be the g.c.d. (normalized to be monic) of the minors of dimension
k of A in (85). Due to the divisibility realitions of the ei, the nonzero minor
of dimension k of E of lowest degree is ei e2 ... ek and divides all other minors
of dimension k. Consequently, this minor is the g.c.d. !:::.k and one has
!:::.k = eie2 ... Ck (87)
for all k. The ratio of two successive expressions (87) yields
Ck= !:::.k/!:::.k-i
This proves the uniqueness of the Smith canonic form E of A. Moreover,
since ek is a polynomial, this proves that !:::.k-i divides !:::.k for all k. However,
note that, although the Smith canonic form is unique, the unimodular
matrices P and Q transforming a given matrix to this form are generally not
unique.
80. If M = AB, then A is a left divisor of M, and Mis a right multiple of A.

A greatest common left divisor (g.c.l.d.) D of A and B (with the same number of
rows) is a common left divisor which is a right multiple of every common left
divisor of A and B. Since the divisibility relations
A=DX; B=DY (88)
can be written
A= (DT)(T-i X); B = (DT)(T-i Y) (89)
where Tis an arbitrary unimodular matrix, DT is like D, a common left

divisor of A and B. A g.c.l.d. of two matrices is thus not unique. Moreover,
if u is an arbitrary vector and D is a g.c.l.d. of A and B, so is
!
[D, Du] (90)
since (90) is clearly a right multiple of D, and a common left divisor of A
,,I and B since the relations
A = [D, Du] [ ! ]; B = [D, Du] [ ~]

are identical to (98). Since a g.c.l.d. can thus be increased by (90) with
arbitrary linear combinations of its columns, we only consider g.c.l.d. with
the minimum number of columns. If one of the matrices A and B, say A, is not
identically singular, a g.c.l.d. with the minimum number of columns must
also be square nonsingular of the same dimension as A, for otherwise the first
relation (88) would give det A = 0, by 13.
J
81. Let A be square of dimension n and not identically singular, let B be any
(n·m)-matrix (with the same number ofrows); consider the Smith transfor-
+
mation of the n · (n m)-matrix.
[A, B] = PEQ (91)
Since A is not identically singular, (91) has normal rank n and E is En
bordered by m columns of zeros. Then PEn is a g.c.l.d. of A and B with the
minimum number of columns and is unique within an arbitrary unimodular
right matrix factor.
+
Proof: The matrix Q is of dimension n m and can be partitioned into
four submatrices. Writing (91) in terms of partitioned matrices, one obtains
A= PEn Qococ; B = PEn QocfJ
hence PEn is a common left divisor of A and B. Conversely, with Q- 1 =R
suitably partitioned, the equation [A, B]R = PE gives
ARococ + BRocfJ = PEn
thus showing that every c.l.d. of A and B divides PEn on the left. This proves
that PEn is a g.c.l.d. Since it is square of dimension n, it has the minimum
number of columns. The uniqueness part will now be proved ab absurdo.
Let D and D1 be two g.c.1.d's of A and B. By definition, each must be a right
=
multiple of the other, thus D = D1 Vand D 1 DU, where U and Vare square
polynomial matrices. One deduces D = DUV. Since A is not identically
singular, neither is D, for det D must divide det A. The last equation can then
be simplified into In = UV, which requires (det U) (det V) = I. Since both
determinants are polynomials, the last condition can only be met if they
both reduce to nonzero constants, and U and V are unimodular.
82. In the hypothesis of 81, the local rank of [A, B] falls below n at ,\ 0 iff A
and B have a common left divisor K such that det K = ,\ - Ao.
Proof: If A= KX, B = KY, one has [A, B] = K[X, Y], and every
minor of dimension n of [A, B] is divisible by det K, hence vanishes at Ao, so
that rank [A, B] < n at Ao. Conversely, if all the minors of dimension n
vanish at Ao and hence are divisible by ,\ - Ao, so is their g.c.d., which is
Lln in the notation of 79. Hence en is divisible by ,\ - Ao, and one can write
En= Ea Eb with Ea= ln-1 f (,\ -Ao) and Eb polynomial. Since K = PEa
is a left factor of the g.c.l.d. PEn of A and B, K divides A and B. Since Pis
unimodular, det K is ,\ - ,\ 0 within a constant factor.
83. In the hypothesis of 81, A and Bare left-coprime if En= 1n; every g.c.l.d.
of A and B is then unimodular. In the following we consider the matrices
(92)
where F and G are constant matrices and F square of dimension n; A is
clearly not identically singular and the hypothesis of 81 is satisfied. If A and
B have a nonunimodular g.c.l.d. D, det D is a polynomial and must divide
all minors of dimension n of G which are constants, and this is impossible
unless all such minors are zero. Consequently, the matrices (92) are left-
coprime if rank G = n. On the other hand, if rank G < n, the matrices (92)
may or may not be left-coprime, and a criterion is defined by the next
theorem.
84. With
N = [G, FG, F2G, ... , Fn -lG] (93)
the matrices (92), where F and Gare constant, are left-coprime iff 12
rank N=n (94)
Proof: By 82, A and B are left-coprime iff rank [ A, B] = n for all ,\.
But rank A= n except when det (F- .\In)= 0, that is, at the eigenvalues
At of F, so rank [A, B] may fall below n only at the At. It thus remains to
prove that (94) is equivalent to
rank[ F - At 1n , G] = n for all i (95)
Condition (94) can also be written rank N' = n. Since N' has n columns, the
last condition is equivalent to the impossibility of N'x = 0 with a nonzero
n-vector x, or to
x'N=O (96)
which decomposes into
x'G=O; x'FG=O; x'F 2G=0; ... , x'Fn- 1G=0 (97)
By analogy with (96), condition (95) is equivalent to the impossibility, with

X =p 0, of
x' [ F - Ai 1n , G] = 0
which splits into
(98)
It now remains to prove that systems (97) and (98) are equivalent.
(a) If x satisfies (98), it satisfies (97). From x' F = Ai x' one deduces
x'F 2 = \ x'F = A~ x' and, similarly, x' Fk = At x' for all k. From x' G = 0 one
then deduces x'FkG = At x'G = 0 for all k.
(b) If x satisfies (97) it satisfies (98). By 52, the characteristic equation
of Fis satisfied by F itself, and this expresses Fn as a linear combination with
constant scalar coefficients of lower powers of F. From (97) one thus deduces
x'FnG = 0. This equation and set (97) without its first equation constitute a
set identical to (97) except for the replacement of x' by x'F. Hence F'x is a
solution of (97) with x. Let [x1, x2, ... ] = X denote a matrix whose columns
form a complete set of linearly independent solution vectors of (97). Since
F'xk is a solution, it is a linear combination of the Xk, hence F'xk = I Xi aik
or F 'X = XA. Let y be an eigenvector of A for some eigenvalue A. One has
Ay = Ay, hence F 'Xy = XAy = AXy. But Xy is a linear combination of the
solution vectors Xk and is thus a solution vector x of (97). With Xy = x, the
last result gives F 'x = Ax and A is one of the eigenvalues of F ', hence of F.
The transpose of the last equation then gives the first equation (98), whereas
the second one is already contained in (97).
85. Denote by Jn(rx) the Jordan matrix of dimension n consisting of some

polynomial rx repeated on the main diagonal, of n - 1 unit entries on the
parallel above it, and of zeros elsewhere. Thus, for instance,
0
(X
0
0
(X
0 !l
The Smith form of J n(rx) is {I, 1, ... , 1, rxn}. This is because the determinant
is rxn, whereas the minor of dimension n - I obtained by deleting the first
column and the last row is lower-triangular with units on its main diagonal,
hence of value 1.
86. A direct sum

Hn(rx) = Ja,(rx) f ... f Ja.(rx)
of Jordan matrices of any dimensions adding up to a total dimension
n = a1 + ··· +ak (99)
and built on the same polynomial a is called a Jordan block of dimension n. Its
determinant is an independently of the partition (99). The Smith form of
Hn(rx.) is the direct sum of the Smith forms of the partial Jordan matrices
rearranged by nondecreasing powers of a. For instance, for Ja(a) Ji(a),+
+
one has {I, 1, a, a: 3} and for J2(a) J 2(a), one has {l, 1, a: 2, a: 2}.
87. Conversely, any Smith form of the type {l, ... , 1, aa•, ... , aa•} with
a 1 s · · · s ak satisfying (99) and with a number of initial unit entries neces-
sary to bring the total dimension to n, can be considered as deduced from
some Hn(rx.) by the above theorem, since the theorem generates all Smith
forms consistent with the stated restrictions. Since any polynomial matrix A
of dimension n and of determinant an has a Smith form E of the stated type,
and since A is equivalent to E and E to H, any polynomial matrix A of
dimension n and of determinant an is equivalent to a Jordan block H based
on a.
ctn } is the Smith form of A and {fh, ... , fJn } the Smith
88. If { a:1, · · · ,
form of B, and if <let A and <let B (and, consequently, all a:
and {Ji) are
+
mutually prime, the Smith form of the direct sum A Bis obtained by multi-
plying entry by entry the sequences
1, ... , 1, a:1, a:2 , ... , ctn1
1, ... , 1, fJ1, fJ2, ... , fJn 2
filled initially with the numbers of units necessary to bring them both to
n = n1 + n2 entries. As an example for n1 = 2, n2 = 3, one has
{I, l, fJ1, a1fJ2, a2fJ3}.
89. Conversely, consider a Smith matrix E = {ei, ... , en} of dimension n

whose determinant is a polynomial of degree n (the dimension of the matrix
must be the same as the degree of its determinant). Any factor a=,\ - Ao of
the determinant appears with nondecreasing exponents in the various
entries ei, so one has ei = aa,qi with a1 < · · · < an, and each qi divides the
next. Let n1 = L ai . Since <let E is of degree n, one has n2 = n - n1 > 0, and
n2 is the sum of the degrees of the qi . By the last theorem, E can be considered
as generated by the Jordan block of order n1 based on a and the partition
a1 ... an (of determinant an 1 ) on one hand, and, on the other, by the matrix
of dimension n2 of entries qi, which is still in Smith form and has a deter-
minant of degree n2. One then repeats the process on some other factor
,\ - ,\i of the last matrix until all factors are exhausted. Finally, any poly-
nomial matrix M of dimension n having a determinant of degree n is equiva-
lent to a direct sum of Jordan blocks. If <let M = TI (,\ -
,\i) n, the block Hi
is based on ,\ - ,\i and is of dimension ni •
90. If Mis of the form Al n -A with A constant, it satisfies the hypothesis

of the last theorem since det Mis of degree n. One may, further, prove in that
case that the equivalence transformation M = PHQ is possible by constant
matrices P and Q such that P = Q- 1 , that is, by a similarity transformation. Let
P(,\) and Q(,\) be some transformation matrices obtained in the above
theorem. Since His itself of the form ,\1 n - B (all diagonal entries in the
Jordan blocks are of the form ,\ - ,\i and all nondiagonal entries are con-
stants), one has Aln-A =P(An-B)Q, or
P- 1 (Aln-A)-(Q,\-BQ)=0 (100)
The left side of ( 100) is a polynomial matrix in ,\ of the form L Mk 11,k. Since
(100) is an identity in,\, one has Mk= 0 for all k. One then also has L MkNk
= 0 for any square matrix N of dimension n, which means that A can be
replaced by Nin (100) provided the notations are interpreted in accordance
l'
with 4. Choose N = A and define T as the constant matrix Q(A); (100)
,!
becomes TA - BT= 0. One thus has
A= T-IBT (101)
and (Aln -A)= T- 1 (Aln -B) T, which is a transformation of the an-
nounced form. Equation ( 101) expresses that any matrix A can be reduced by
a similarly transformation into its Jordan normal form B. Since det (Al n -A)=
det (Aln -B) vanishes when,\ is an eigenvalue of A, the diagonal entries of
the Jordan form B of A are the eigenvalues ,\1 of A.
appendix B
Properties of analytic functions 1
Extremal theorems
I. Letf(P) be analytic inside and on the contour C. Cauchy's theorem
f(Po) = 1-. J f(p)

2TTJ cP -Po
dp (1)
expresses the value of f(p) at an interior point Po in terms of its values on

the contour. If the contour is a circle of radius r centered on Po, one has
p - Po = rei</J, and (I) becomes
f(Po) = 217T J2" f(p) de/>
O
(2)
+
From the triangle inequality ja bj < jaj +
jbj holding for any two complex
numbers a and b, one deduces that the modulus of a sum (or an integral)
cannot exceed the sum of the moduli of the summands (integrands). Let Pi
be one of the points of C where jf(p)j reaches its maximum value (there
may be several such points); one has jf(p)j::;: jf(Pi)!, and (2) gives
I
lf(Po)I::;: 27T t
2,,
lf(P)I de/>< 27T
I
t
2,,
lf(Pi)I de/>= lf(Pi)I
This proves that the modulus of an analytic function cannot take, on the
center of a circle, a value larger than its maximum on the circumference.
By analytic continuation (taking new circles centered on the first circum-
ference), one proves immediately that the modulus of an analytic furu:tion cannot
have a maximum at an interior point of its domain of analyticity, but only on the
boundary.
417
418 appendix B: Properties of analytic functions
2. Applying this theorem to the functions e±/(p), which are analytic with
J(p), and noting that
ie±f(P)l2 = e±[f(p)+f*(P)l = e±2 Re /(p)
and that ex(e-x) is a monotone increasing (decreasing) function of x, one

proves that the real part of an analytic Junction can have neither a maximum nor a
minimum at an interior point of its domain of analyticity, but only on the boundary.
Note that there is no minimum theorem for the modulus.
Hilbert transforms
3. Let f ( p) be analytic in Rep > 0, thus including the imaginary axis and the
point at infinity, so that f( oo) is finite. The Cauchy integral (1), where
Po = jwo is an arbitrary point of the imaginary axis, vanishes for the contour
of Fig. 1 which follows the imaginary axis (except for a small semicircular
indentation of radius e avoiding the pole at p = Po) and returns by a half-
circle oflarge radius R. For e tending to zero and R large, the integral on the
imaginary axis tends to the Cauchy principal value of the integral in w taken
from - oo to + oo. The contribution of the semicircle of radius e can be
explicitly evaluated as in (2) and yields
l J"/2
217 _,,12 J(Po) dcp = ½f(Po)
Fm.B.l
Hilbert transforms 419
whereas the contribution of the semicircle of radius R (taken in the opposite

direction) similarly yields -½f(oo). As a consequence, one has
I
-2 .
J"' f(jw)dw
---+½J(Jwo) -½f(oo) =0
.
TT) -oo W -wo
thus
f(jwo) =f(oo) --:-

I J"' f (jw) dw
(3)
)TT -o, W -wo
Separating the real and imaginary parts, with f(jw) = u(w) +jv(w), one
finds
u(wo) =u(oo) - -
l J"' v(w) dw
(4)
TT -oo W -wo
v(wo) = v( oo) +-l J"'

TT -oo W
u(w) dw
-Wo
(5)
The integrals appearing in (4) and (5) are called Hilbert transforms of the
functions v(w) and u(w). We have thus proved that the real and imaginary parts
of an analytic function in Re p > 0 are reciprocal Hilbert transforms, within an
additive constant. The constants vanish if f ( oo) = 0, and this is the only case
where one component completely determines the other. 2
4. If, in addition,f(p) is a real/unction, one has [f(jw)]*=f(-jw);thus

u(w) -jv(w)=u(-w) +jv(-w), so that u is even and vodd in w. Sincef(p)
stays real for p tending to infinity by real values, one has v( oo) = 0. By
decomposing the integrals into a contribution from - oo to 0 and a contribu-
tion from 0 to oo, and by transforming the first contribution by using the
parity relations, one obtains
u(Wo) =u(oo) - -
2 J"' v(w) dw2 2 (6)
TT O W -Wo
(
V Wo
_ 2w0
)- -
J"' u(w) dw 2 2 (7)
TT O W -wo
5. The derivation of (4) and (5) assumed Po finite. An additional relation,
however, is obtained by applying Cauchy's theorem directly to an analytic
function whose Taylor expansion in l /p near p = oo is of the form
(8)
The integral
fJJ(p) - ao] dp (9)

vanishes on any contour in Rep> 0 iff(P) is analytic in that region. If C is

taken as the imaginary axis completed by a semicircle of large radius, the
principal value of the integrand on the semicircle is a1/P, so the integral
becomes -jTTa1, The imaginary part of (9) thus gives
(10)
For a real function, a1 is real and (10) reduces to
(11)
where a1 is defined as
a1 = - Iim[wv(w)] w= oo ( 12)
as results from (8).
The logarithm of a rational function

6. Let g(p) be a rational function and consider the function
f(p) = log g(p) (13)
Since, with g = Rej0, one has
log g = log R +j0 (14)
the real part of ( 14) is the logarithm of the modulus of g and the imaginary
part of (14) is the argument (or phase) of g. Since 0 is only defined within
2kTT, the function ( 13) is only defined within 2jkTT and is multivalued. If the
indetermination is raised at one point (for instance, by taking the principal
value between 0 and 2TT, or between -TT and TT), the phase can be extended
by continuity to adjacent points, but this only yields a unique result if one
does not encircle poles and zeros of g: near a point Po where g = A(p -Po)n
(with n positive or negative), and with p -Po= reH>, one has f = Arnejn<f>,
and log g increases by 2nTTj for every counterclockwise turn around Po.
1. If g and its inverse are analytic in Rep> 0, its phase can be extended from
some arbitrary point to the whole open half-plane Rep > 0. With this con-
vention, the function ( 13) is single-valued, and analytic in Re p > 0. The
behavior of 0 on the j-axis is also deduced from the values in Re p > 0 by
the following arguments. The phase 0 is a continuous function of w except
at the singularities of ( 13) on the j-axis, corresponding to zeros or poles of g.
If one follows the j-axis in the positive direction and meets a zero of order n
The logarithm of a rational function 421
of g at p = jwo, it can be avoided by a small semicircle in Rep 2 0, and this

produces a discontinuity mr in the phase, so that one has
0(wo+) -0(wo-) =mr ( 15)
Similarly, the discontinuity is -mr for a pole of order n atjwo. The case of
a zero of order n at infinity is treated similarly by considering a large semi-
circle in Rep 2 0; since the positive direction on the j-axis is continued by
the semicircle in the clockwise direction, the sign of the discontinuity is
changed, and one has
0( +oo) -0(-oo) = -mr ( 16)
8. With the hypothesis of 7, (13) is analytic in Rep> 0, but not on the

j-axis, in contrast with the hypothesis of 3. We now show that the hypothesis
of 3 can be relaxed to accept singularities on the j-axis provided they are
logarithmic, which is the case for (13). Near a logarithmic singularity at
some point Pi= jw1, f(p) becomes infinite as A log (p -Pi) where A is a
constant. The results of3 remain valid if the singularity is avoided by a semi-
circular indentation of radius e in Rep> 0, and if the contribution of this
supplementary path is added to the integral. We now show that this con-
tribution is zero; with p - Pi = eei</J, the contribution to (I) is
A Jrr/2 log f + j<p
- - - - - - ejei</J d<p
2'7Tj -rr/2 Pi - Po + eei</J
and tends to zero with e, since e log e tends to zero. As for logarithmic singu-
larities at infinity, they cannot be accepted as such since (3) assumes J (oo)
finite. If g(p) has a pole or zero of order n at infinity, it disappears in h(p) =
p±ng(p) and
log h = log g ± n log p = log g ± n log w ±jn'TT/2 (17)
is finite at infinity. Relations (4-5) hold for the real and imaginary parts of
f = log h and yield similar relations for log g by ( l 7).
9. By (4) applied to (14), 0(w) determines log R(w) within an additive con-
stant, hence R(w) within a constant factor; similarly, by (5), R(w) deter-
mines 0(w) within an additive constant. To conclude: if g(p) is rational and
analytic, together with its inverse, in Rep > 0, its modulus on the j-axis determines
the function within a constant phase, and its phase on the j-axis determines the Junction
within a real constant factor. In the above statement 0( w) is the phase taken with
its discontinuities as defined in 7 and the discontinuities are assumed to be
given in the specification of 0( w), which is normally not the case when 0 is
defined by its analytic expression deduced from
e2JB=g/g* (18)
If g has a zero or pole of order n at jwo, the factor (p - jw 0 ) n becomes

jn(w -wo)n in g and cancels with its conjugate in (18), except for a residual
± sign. Consequently, if the analytic expression of 0(w) is computed from
(18), its logarithmic singularities on the imaginary axis disappear. The result-
l ing continuous function 0o( w) is called the smooth phase of g; the true phase
0(w) differs from 0o(w) by the discontinuities discussed in 7. When 0o(w) is
the only datum, there is no way of recovering the discontinuities.
i
!
notes
Chapter I
1 There is no generally accepted terminology to distinguish between a net-
work (complete network, terminated network, circuit) and a subnetwork
(multiterminal network, open network, or simply network), and the dis-
tinction is often ignored although it is methodologically important in the
foundations of the theory.
2 A detailed discussion on the number of equations, initial conditions, etc.,
is to be found in Chap. 2. The analysis problem is only mentioned at this

point to motivate the introduction of concepts and terminology.
3 The method and possibility of elimination are fully discussed in Chap. 3.
At present our motivation is as in note 2.

4 State is here taken in its general sense as appearing in the expressions
steady state, transient state, etc., and not in the narrow sense of state space or
state variables as used in system or control theory, and later in this book
(1.10, 1.15, and Chap. 2).
5 No knowledge of graph theory is assumed of the reader, and the necessary
results are established in the next sections. For additional results, and a
bibliography, a convenient recent reference is S. Seshu and M. B. Reed,
Linear Graphs and Electrical Networks, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1961.
6 Our definition of a tree does not imply that it is connected. Some authors
who restrict the term to connected trees use forest in the general case.
423
424 notes
7 Called E-matrix by I. Cederbaum, J. Math. Phys. 36, 351-61 (1958). Our

terminology is taken from C. Berge, Theorie des graphes et ses applications,
Dunod, Paris, 1958.
8 Comments and references on the algorithms ofR. Gould [J. Math. Phys. 37
(3), 194-214 (Oct. 1958)] and others, and on criteria of W. T. Tutte, may
be found in the reference of note 5 and in V. Belevitch, "On the realizability
of graphs with prescribed circuit matrices," in Switching Theory in Space
Technology (H. Aiken and W. F. Main, eds.), Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford,
Calif., 1963, pp. 126-144.
Chapter 2
1 The state variable approach is usual in mechanics. Although it has been
used, more or less implicitly, in network theory, for instance by Tellegen
[TE 6], its introduction is attributed to T. R. Bashkow, IRE. Trans. CT-4,
117-120 (Sept. 1957). A recent survey is E. S. Kuh and R. A. Rohrer,
Proc. IEEE 53 (7), 672-686 (July 1965).
2 We base our network analysis on the Hermite and Smith forms of poly-
nomial matrices, rather than on the more often used Jordan form, since the
extension to subnetworks (in Chap. 3) follows more easily.
3 Suggested by A. Fettweis (private communication).
4 Invented by Tellegen [TE 2].
5 H. Whitney has proved (see ref. in note 1.5) that electrically equivalent
graphs are topologically equivalent within a series interchange of 2-terminal

subgraphs, so the dual of a planar graph is unique within the same inter-
change.
6 The imaginary resistance has been introduced by Baum [BA 3--4] in narrow
band problems and systematically used as a tool in synthesis by Belevitch

[BE 12, 13, 14, 17, 18].
7 These concepts are classical in the transmission analysis of channels with
asymmetric side-band characteristics. See, for instance, C. Cherry, Pulses
and Transients in Communication Circuits, Chapman-Hall, London, 1949,
Chap. 7.
8 The alternative definition of instantaneous power as Re v(t) Re i(t) in the
complex case, which also reduces to the conventional definition in the real
case, is advocated by R. Newcomb, Proc. IEEE 53 (10), 1651-1652 (Dec.
1965), but has no physical justification and is sterile, for the imaginary
resistance is then not passive. In contrast, the definition adopted here, which
Chapter 4 425
was proposed in [YO 1], brings the theory of passive networks to its natural
completeness.
9 Due to J. L. Bordewijk, Appl. Sci. Res. Nether[. 6B (1-2), 1-74 (1956).
Chapter 3
1 First described in [BE 16].
2 Our definition of a well-defined n-port is almost equivalent to the definition
of a solvable n-port in [YO 1].

3 The notation Hin (8-9) originates from hybrid; the matrix has no relation
with the matrix (1) also denoted by H by analogy with (2.4) where this
notation originates from the Hermite form.
4 The lower asterisk and tilde were introduced by Bayard [BA 5], whereas
the prefix para is due to Oono [00 3].
5 Pathological I-ports are mentioned indirectly in [TE 8] and discussed by
H.J. Carlin and D. C. Youla, Proc. IRE 49, 907-920 (May 1961); H.J.
Carlin, IEEE Trans. CT-11, 67-72 (March 1964); B. D. H. Tellegen,
ibid. CT-13, 466-469 (Dec. 1966).
6The existence of a hybrid matrix for a passive n-port was first established
by J. K. Zuidweg, IEEE Trans. CT-12 (1), 131-132 (March 1965).
7 The concepts of uncontrollable and inobservable states originate from
system theory; see, for instance, [KA 1]. Our approach is different, how-
ever, and its equivalence with Kalman's approach is indirectly established
in Chap. 8, in particular by theorem 8.28.
Chapter 4
1 These extensions were established in [BE 6].
2 V. Belevitch, Elec. Comm. 24 (2), 192-194 (June 1947).
3 To the author's best knowledge, this circuit is due to W. Klein, Grundlagen
der Theorie elektrischen Schaltungen, Akad. Verlag, Berlin, 1961.
4 Complex transformers were introduced in [BE 14] and were further dis-
cussed in [BE 18].

5 A detailed discussion is outside the scope of this book and only a few ele-
mentary results are included. For further results see [WE 1] and the panel
discussion in IRE Trans. CT-9 (3), 202-214 (Sept. 1962).
426 notes
6 The term, Howitt transformation is used in [BA 5] and [NE 1] as a result

of the early papers by N. Howitt, Phys. Rev. 37, 1583-1595 (June 1931) and
Proc. IRE 20 (6), 1042-1051 (June 1932).
7 The further material is a slightly improved version of [BE 16].
Chapter 5
1 The original Brune process [BR 1] is based on a temporary extraction of a
negative inductance or capacitance but operates on real elements. The
temporary use of imaginary resistances [BE 12] gives a considerable simpli-
fication in the proof.
2 The limiting cases of equality in (41) are discussed in 9.10; this also holds
for (70).
Chapter 6
1 The first references for the scattering matrix and its basic properties are
[MO 1] and [BE 1]. The history of this concept is discussed by H.J. Carlin,
IRE Trans. CT-3 (2), 88-97 (June 1956). For elementary applications,
see [BE 9].
2 The results of 29-35 originate from [BE 2].
3The further results originate from [YO 3], but we reproduce our proof of
[BE 18]. See also R. A. Rohrer, IEEE Trans. CT-12 (2), 223-230 (June
1965).
4The concepts of symmetry and antimetry are extended to 2n-ports in
[BE 6].
Chapter 7
1 Most of the material of 10-28 is adapted from [BE 3, 13, 00 3, YO 1, 6].
The example (32) is due to Youla (private communication). The concept of
normal rank has only been defined in A.70 for matrices whose entries are
functions of the complex variable p; the somewhat abusive use of the same
term for nonanalytic matrices, in 16 and following sections, however, offers
no difficulty.
2 The intermediate use of imaginary transformers makes the following syn-
thesis much simpler than the one originally published [00 3].
3 Our treatment is similar to the one of [CA l].
4 Adapted from [BE 11].
5 Adapted from [BE 18].
Chapter 9 427
Chapter 8
1 The degree (called order) of an n-port was defined by Tellegen, first for
lossless 2-ports [TE 1, 3-5), then for general n-ports [TE 7) and, indepen-
dently, by McMillan [MC 1) and Oono-Yasuura [00 3). Similar definitions
are found in [BE 13) and [DU I], and the equivalence of the various defini-
tions is discussed in [KA 4). Our presentation is original.
2 See [YO 4).
3 The basic references are [KA 1-5) and [AN 1).
4 The basic references are [CA 2) and [00 3). Since the Kalman canonic
representation is generally not passive in the dissipative case, and since

similarity transformations have no network interpretation, the application
of this approach to the synthesis and equivalence of dissipative n-ports has
not yet been completely successful. In addition to [YO 9), we mention the
following contributions: E. S. Kuh, D. M. Layton, and J. Tow, Network
Analysis and Synthesis via State Variables, Univ. Calif., Berkeley, August, 1966;
and B. D. 0. Anderson and R. W. Newcomb, Impedance Synthesis via State-
space Techniques, Stanford Univ., April, 1966. Since the general synthesis and
equivalence problem has been completely solved long ago by other tech-
niques [00 3) to be discussed in Chap. 12, we see no reason for attempting
to derive the same results by more devious means.
5The following proof is simpler than [00 3), owing to the use of the hybrid
matrix.
6 Adapted from [YO 8) and [BE 16).
7 By neglecting to count the number of parameters, most authors obtain
synthesis procedures which are redundant in the number of elements. The
numbers of parameters of real reciprocal n-ports of given degree is estab-
lished in [TE 7). Our treatment is an improved version of our previous
publications [BE 13, 19).
Chapter 9
1 For the iterative synthesis we follow our approach of [BE 18).
2 P. I. Richard, Duke Math. J. 3, 777-778 (Sept. 1947).
3 The angle inequality has been deduced by Cauer [CA 2) from Schwarz's
lemma.
4 Established independently by Darlington [DA 1) and Piloty 5 [PI 1). The
derivation of the Darlington section from two Youla sections is also given in
428 notes
[YO 5). A treatment based on the impedance matrix is to be found m

[BE 11) and is inspired by J. Ville, Cables et Transm., 59-70 (1949).
5 The original reference is [FI 1] ; we follow our proof of [BE 8).
6 The original reference is [BO 2); we follow our proof of [BE 5).
7 R. H. Pantell, Proc. IRE, 816 (1954); J.E. Storer, Proc. IRE, 1451 (1954).
8 For real 2-ports, the results of 29-34 are essentially the ones of [DA 1] and
have been stated in terms of scattering parameters in [BE 7). Our notations
follow [CA 2).
9 See [BA 2) and [BE 1OJ ; also [FE 1].
lo Our treatment is a simplification of [PI 2) and [YO 7).
Chapter 10
1 This method has been worked out as an extension of the Brune process for
one-ports in [MC 1, 00 1, TE 7]. Our treatment is an improved version of
[BE 14 and 18).
2 This theorem has been generalized by R. W. Newcomb, IEEE Trans.
CT-10 (1), 125 (March 1963).

3 This inequality is generalized in Chap. 11. Its relation with Schwarz's
lemma is discussed in [BE 17) and [YO 6).

4The remainder of this chapter is original; the corresponding results in
[YO 6) are incorrect.
Chapter 11
1 This chapter is an improved version of [BE 18) taking into account the
criticisms of [YO 6), particularly for 6-10 and 25--28. Most of the realizations
are, however, unpublished and the corresponding results of [YO 6) are
incorrect. The factorization of para-unitary matrices has also been obtained
in [00 3). The earlier synthesis procedures ofR. Leroy and M. Bayard (see
references in [BA 5)) and Oono [00 2) are generally redundant in the
number of elements and are only of historical interest.
Chapter 12
1 The principle of this synthesis is described in [BE 3), but the corresponding
rational factorization does not allow a discussion of all solutions and does
not generally yield economical realizations. The only satisfactory treatment
is [00 3); our reformulation is inspired from [YO 2, 4) and derives the
Appendix B 429
physical solutions from a unique basic nonphysical solution by inserting all-

pass 2n-ports, whereas, in the original presentation, all-pass 2n-ports are
extracted from a unique regular (thus physical) solution of excessive degree.
Appendix A
1 These may be found in almost any book on matrix algebra. In the prep-
aration of this appendix the following books were found most useful;
A. C. Aitken, Determinants and Matrices, Oliver and Boyd, London, 1958:
F. R. Gantmacher, Matrix Theory, Chelsea, New York, 1959; M. Bocher,
Introduction to Higher Algebra, Macmillan, New York, 1907; C. C. McDuffee,
The Theory of Matrices, Chelsea, New York, 1946; D. E. Littlewood, A
University Algebra, Heinemann, London, 1950; R. Bellman, Introduction to
Matrix Ana(ysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1960; M. Marcus, H. Ming,
A Survey of Matrix Theory and Inequalities, Allyn-Bacon, Boston, 1964.
2 We avoid the term order, even for a square matrix, because it will be
reserved for the order of a pole in rational matrices.
3 We avoid the term element, because it is used for network elements.
4 The origin of the name is explained in note 4.6.
5It is convenient to have a short name for such matrices; their use m
Gauss' algorithm (see A.34) justifies the name adopted here.
6 The matrix D is the rth compound of A.
7More usually, m - r is the column-nullity, but the row-nullify n - r will
never be used in this book.
8The term semi-positive will not be used, for it may seem to imply that f
actually vanishes for some x =I= 0, whereas the omission of strict(y in our ter-
minology merely states one's ignorance as to the existence or nonexistence
of such an x.
9 The origin of the name comes from its use in 2.40.
10This theorem and its proof are in [CA 2). The proof by R. W. Newcomb,
Quart. Appl. Math. 19 (2), 144 (1961), is similar.
11 See [00 3].
12As stated, this theorem is probably new, but equivalent formulations are
known in control theory: see references in note 8.3.
Appendix B
1 General references [GU I], [BO l].
2 The above proof is in W. Cauer, Elek. Nachr.-Tech., 17-34 (1940).
references
AN l Anderson, B. D. 0., R. W. Newcomb, R. E. Kalman, and D. C.

Youla, "Equivalence of linear time-invariant dynamical systems,"
J. Franklin Inst. 281, 371-378 (May 1966).
BA l Balabanian, N., Network Synthesis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
N.J., 1958.
BA 2 Bauer, F. L., "Die Betriebs-Kettenmatrix von Vierpolen," Arch.
Elek. Vbertrag. 9, 559-560 (Dec. 1960).
BA 3 Baum, R. F., "Design of unsymmetrical band-pass filters," IRE
Trans. CT-4, 30-40 (June 1957).
BA 4 - - - , "A modification ofBrune's method for narrow-band filters,"
IRE Trans. CT-5, 264-267 (Dec. 1958).
BA 5 Bayard, M. Theorie des rr!seaux de Kirchhoff, Edit. Rev. d'Optique,
Paris, 1954.
BE Belevitch, V., "Transmission losses in 2n-terminal networks,"
J. Appl. Phys. 19 (7), 636-638 (July 1948).
BE 2 - - - , "Theory of 2n-terminal networks with applications to con-
ference telephony," Elec. Comm. 27 (3), 231-244 (Sept. 1950).
BE 3 - - - , "Synthese des reseaux electriques passifs a n paires de bornes
de matrice de repartition predeterminee," Ann. Telecomm. 6 (11),
302-312 (Nov. 1951).
BE 4 - - - , " Fundamental results and outstanding problems of network
synthesis," Tijdschr. Nederland. Radiogen. 18 ( 1), 33-51 (Jan. 1953).
BE 5 - - - , "On the Bott-Duffin synthesis of driving-point impedances,"
IRE Trans. CT-1, 68 (Sept. 1954).
430
references 431
BE 6 - - - , " Synthesis of 4-wire conference networks and related

problems," Proc. Symp. Modern Network Synthesis, Polytechnic Insti-
tute of Brooklyn, April 1955, pp. 175-195.
BE 7 - - - , "Topics in the design of insertion loss filters," IRE Trans.
CT-2 (4), 337-346 (Dec. 1955).
BE 8 - - - , "On the Fialkow-Gerst impedance synthesis," IRE Trans.
CT-3 (1), 80 (March 1956).
BE 9 - - - , "Elementary applications of the scattering formalism to
network design," IRE Trans. CT-3 (2), 97-104 (June 1956).
BE 10 - - - , "Four-dimensional transformations on four-pole matrices
with applications to the synthesis of reactances 4-poles," IRE Trans.
CT-3 (2), 105-111 (June 1956).
BE 11 - - - , Theorie des circuits de telecommunications, Uystpruyst, Louvain
et Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 195 7.
BE 12 - - - , "An alternative derivation of Brune's cycle," IRE Trans.
CT-6 (4), 389-390 (Dec. 1959).
BE 13 - - - , "The algebraic structure of formal realizability theory,"
Revue H.F. 4 (8), 183-194 (Dec. 1959).
BE 14 - - - , "On the Brune process for n-ports," IRE Trans. CT-7 (3),
280-296 (Sept. 1960).
BE 15 - - - , "Summary of the history of circuit theory," Proc. IRE 50
(5), 848-855 (May 1962).
BE 16 - - - , "On network analysis by polynomial matrices," in Recent
Developments in Network Theory (S. R. Deards, ed.), Pergamon,
Oxford, 1963, pp. 19-30.
BE 17 - - - , "Schwarz's lemma and positive real matrices," IEEE
Trans. CT-10 (1), 116-117 (March 1963).
BE 18 - - - , "Factorization of scattering matrices with applications to
passive network synthesis," Phil. Res. Repts. 18 (4), 275-317 (Aug.
1963).
BE 19 - - - , "The maximum number of parameters of n-ports of various
classes," Phil. Res. Repts. 19 (2), 73-77 (April 1964).
BO Bode, H. W., Network Analysis and Feedback Amplifier Design, Van
Nostrand, Princeton, N.J., 1945.
BO 2 Bott, R., and R. J. Duffin, "Impedance synthesis without use of
transformers," J. Appl. Phys. 20 (8), 816 (Aug. 1949).
BR I Brune, 0., "Synthesis ofa finite two-terminal network whose driving
point impedance is a prescribed function of frequency," J. Math.
Phys. 10 (3), 191-236 (Aug. 1931).
CA 1 Carlin, H.J., and A. B. Giordano, Network Theory, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964.
432 references
CA 2 Cauer, W., Theorie der linearen Wechselstromschaltungen, Akad. Verlag,

Berlin, 1941; English translation, Synthesis of Linear Communication
Networks, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1958.
DA 1 Darlington, S., "Synthesis of reactance 4-poles which produce pre-
scribed insertion loss characteristics," J. Math. Phys. 18, 257-355
(Sept. 1939).
DU 1 Duffin, R. J., and D. Hazony, "The degree of a rational matrix
function," J. SIAM 11 (3), 645-658 (Sept. 1963).
FE Felsen, L. B., and W. L. Kahn, "Transfer characteristics of 2n-port
networks," Proc. Brooklyn Polytechnic Symp. IX, 477-512 (1959).
FI Fialkow, A., and I. Gerst, "Impedance synthesis without mini-
mization," J. Math. Phys. 34 (3), 160-168 (1955).
GU 1 Guillemin, E. A., The Mathematics ofCircuit Analysis, Wiley, New York,
1949.
GU 2 - - - , Synthesis of Passive Networks, Wiley, New York, 1957.
HA 1 Hazony, D., Elements of Network Synthesis, Reinhold, New York,
1963.
KA 1 Kalman, R. E., "Canonical structure of linear dynamical systems,"
Proc. Nat. Acad. Sc. 48 (4), 596-600 (April 1962).
KA 2 - - - , "Mathematical description of linear dynamical systems,"
J. SIAM Control A.I (2), 152-192 (1963).
KA 3 - - - , "On a new characterization of linear passive systems,"
Proc. First Allerton Conj., 456-470 (Nov. 1963).
KA 4 - - - , "Irreducible realizations and the degree of a matrix of
rational functions," J. SIAM 13 (2), 520-544 (June 1965).
KA 5 - - - , "On canonical realizations," Arch. Autom. i Telemech. 10,
3-10 (1965).
KU 1 Kuh, E. S., and D. 0. Pederson, Principles of Circuit Synthesis,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959.
MC 1 l\rfcMillan, B., "Introduction to formal realizability theory," Bell
System Tech. J. 31 (2), 217-279; (3), 541-600 (March, May 1952).
MO 1 Montgomery, C. G., R. N. Dicke, and E. M. Purcell, Principles of
Microwave Circuits, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948.
NE 1 Newcomb, R. W., Linear Multiport Synthesis, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1966.
00 1 Oono, Y., "Synthesis of a finite 2n-terminal network as the extension
of Brune's 2-terminal network theory," J. Inst. Elec. Comm. Japan
31 (9), 163-181 (Aug. 1948) (in Japanese).
00 2 - - - , " Synthesis of a finite 2n-terminal network by a group of
networks each of which contains only one ohmic resistance,"
J. Math. Phys. 29, 13-26 (April 1950).
references 433
00 3 Oono, Y., and K. Yasuura, "Synthesis of finite passive 2n-terminal

networks with prescribed scattering matrices," Mem. Fae. Eng.
Kyushu Univ. 14 (2), 125-177 (May 1954). French translation, Ann.
Telecomm. 9 (3), 73-80 (March 1954); (4), 109-115 (April 1954);
(5), 133-140 (May 1954).
PI Piloty, H., "Kanonische Kettenschaltungen for Reaktanzvierpole
mit vorgeschriebenem Betriebsverhalten," Tel. Fernsprech. Funk
Fernseh Tech. 29, 249-258, 279-290, 320-325 (Sept., Oct., Nov.
1940).
PI 2 - - - , " Die Halbierung eines symmetrischen Reaktanz-Vier-
pols," Sitzber. Bayer Akad. Wiss (Math-Nat) 1947, 187-236.
TE 1 Tellegen, B. D. H., "Network synthesis, especially the synthesis of
resistanceless four-terminal networks," Phil. Res. Repts. 1, 169-184
(April 1946).
TE 2 - - - , "The gyrator, a new electric network element," Phil. Res.
Repts. 3 (2), 81-101 (April 1948).
TE 3 - - - , "Synthesis of passive, resistanceless four-poles that may
violate the reciprocity relation," Phil. Res. Repts. 3 (5), 321-337
(Oct. 1948).
TE 4 - - - , " Synthesis of passive two-poles by means of networks con-
taining gyrators," Phil. Res. Repts. 4, 31-37 (1949).
TE 5 ---,"Complementary note on the synthesis of passive resistance-
less four-poles," Phil. Res. Repts. 4 (5), 366-369 (Oct. 1949).
TE 6 - - - , Theorie der electrische Netwerken, vol. 3 of Theorie der Wissel-
stromen (with G. J. Elias), Noordhoff, Groningen, 1952.
TE 7 - - - , " Synthesis of 2n-poles by networks containing the mini-
mum number of elements," J. Math. Phys. 32 (1), 1-18 (April
1953).
TE 8 - - - , "La recherche pour une serie complete d'elements de
circuits ideaux non-lineaires," Rendic. Sem. Math. Fis. Milano 25,
134-144 (1953-1954).
VA 1 Van Valkenburg, M. E., Introduction to modern network synthesis, Wiley,
New York, 1960.
WE 1 Weinberg, L., Network Ana(ysis and synthesis, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1962.
YO 1 Youla, D. C., L. J. Castriota, and H. J. Carlin, "Bounded real
scattering matrices and the foundation of linear passive network
theory," IRE Trans. CT-4 (1), 102-124 (March 1959); corrections,
Ibid., 317 (Sept. 1959).
YO 2 Youla, D. C., "Physical realizability criteria," IRE Conv. Rec. 2,
181-199 (March 1960).
434 references
YO 3 Youla, D. C., "On scattering matrices normalized to complex port

numbers," Proc. IRE 49 (7), 1221 (July 1961).
YO 4 - - - , "On the factorization of rational matrices," IRE Trans.
IT-7 (3), 172-189 (July 1961).
YO 5 ---,"Anew theory of cascade synthesis," IRE Trans. CT-8 (3),
244-260 (Sept. 1961); correction, Ibid. IRE Trans. CT-13 (1),
90-91 (March 1966).
YO 6 - - - , "Cascade synthesis of passive n-ports," Polytechnic Inst.
Brooklyn Rept. PIMBRI-1271-65 (June 1965).
YO 7 - - - , "Two theorems on positive-real functions and their appli-
cation to the synthesis of symmetric and antimetric filters," IEEE
Trans. CT-13 (1), 18-31 (March 1966).
YO 8 Youla, D. C., and P. Tissi, "An explicit formula for the degree of a
rational matrix," Polytechnic Inst. Brooklyn Rept. PIMBRI-1272-65
(June 1965).
YO 9 - - - , " N-port synthesis via reactance extraction-part I,"
IEEE Conv. Rec., 1966.
index*
Abstract n-port, 4 Apparent power, 49

Abstractly lossless (passive, reciprocal), Attenuation, 166
50 Attenuation characteristic, 285
Active power, 48 Attenuator, 177
Adjoint, 388 Average (energy, power), 48
Admittance, 67
Admittance-degenerate, 187 Balanced 2-port, 101
Algebraic nullity, 401
Algebraic turns-ratio, 9
Balanced n-port, 121
Bartlett's theorem, 104
,
All-pass extraction, 256 Basic solution (unitary bordering), 368
All-pass function, 167 Biconjugate 4-port, 202
All-pass free, 168 Bilinear form, 50
All-pass free 2-port, 280 Binet-Cauchy theorem, 389
All-pass free at r-ports, 372 Bordered matrix, 393
All-pass 2-port, 213 Bott-Duffin synthesis, 271
All-pass Zn-port, 334 Bounded function, 160
All-pass sections, 2-port, 214, 220 Bounded matrix, 163, 189
Zn-port, 336 Branch, 17
Ampere-turns, 4 Bridge, 213
Analytic function, 417 Bridged-T, 216
Analytic matrix, 184 Brune function, 131
Angle inequality, 147, 261 Brune section, 148
Antimetric 2-port, 178, 279, 298 Brune synthesis, 143
*The purpose of the index is not so much to help the reader in finding the section
where a subject is treated (this is more easily done by consulting the table of contents)
as in locating the page where a given term is defined or used in an essential way.
Complex expressions such as positive real matrix are only listed once, at their initial
word (positive).
435
436 index
Campbell's formula, 123 Current constraint matrix, 12, 120

Capacitance, l, 4 Current generator, 5
Carrier, 58 Current vector, 6
Cascade connection, of all pass 2n-ports,
335 Darlington synthesis, 264
of lossless 2-ports, 288 Defective matrix, 402
of matched 2-ports, 179 Degenerate n-port, 187
Cascade decomposition, 256 Degree, of bounded para-unitary matrix,
Cascade n-port synthesis, 343 229
Cauchy principal value, 418 of Kirchhoff network, 126, 251
Cauer's reactance synthesis, 141 of lossless 2-port, 278
Cayley-Hamilton theorem, 402 of network, 38
Chain-matrix, 108 of n-port, 222
Change of reference impedance, l 73 of 1-port, 132
Characteristic equation, 40 l of polynomial matrix, 222, 249
Characteristic function (lossless 2-port), of rational function, 132
278 of rational matrix, 224, 249
Characteristic roots, 39 of real passive non-reciprocal network,
Chord, 24 130
Circuit, 22 Degree reduction in n-port synthesis, 332,
Circulator, 196 345
Cofactor, 388 Determinant, 386
Column-echelon form, 82 Diagonal matrix, 385
Column-vector, 385 Differential transformer, 204
Complete controllability, 81 Dimensionality of n-port, 64, 73
Complete observability, 84 Dimensions of matrix, 385
Complete system of independent loops, Direct sum, of matrices, 386
24 of n-ports, 35
Complete tree, 24 Directional coupler, 206
Complex amplitude, 45, 57 Dissipated power, 5, 49
Complex ideal transformer, 120 Dissipation factor, 155
Complex power, 48, 59 Dominant matrix, 121
Concrete n-port, 4, 50 Duality, 54
Conductance, 4 Dualizer, 106, 117
Congruence transformation, 94, 394
Conjunctive transformation, 120, 193, Eigenvalue, eigenvector, 401
394 Electrical energy, 5
Conjugate matching, 159 Elementary solutions of network equa-
Conjugate (transpose) matrix, 194, tions, 41
385 Elements (network), I, 4
Connected graph, 21 Elimination, 63
Connection n-port, 19 Entry, 385
Constant matrix, 406 Envelope, 58
Continued fraction, 93, 136 Equivalent circuits, 30, 115
Conventional elements, l, 5 Equivalent ideal transformer n-ports, 14
Convex polyhedron, 57 Equivalent linear systems, 39, 392
Cotree, 24 Equivalent lossless n-ports, 241
Cotree product, 124 Equivalent matrices, 407
Coupling coefficient, 9 Equivalent n-ports, 3, 126
Current, l Euclid algorithm, 141
index 437
Exponential state, 46 Impedance, 67

Extraction of a j-axis pole, 135, 184 Impedance-degenerate, 187
Impedance transformation, 110
Factorization, of bounded function, 167 Incidence matrix, node branch, 20
of 2-port transfer matrix, 291 loop-branch, 22
of scattering matrix, 329 Incident signal, 162
Feldtkeller's relation, 177 Inductance, 1, 4
Fialkow-Gerst synthesis, 270 Inequality (rank), 189
Forced solution, 38, 44 Initial conditions, 4, 7, 38
Foster function, I 31 lnobservable, 84, 275
Foster matrix, 185 In-phase, 59
Foster reactance theorem, 135 Instantaneous power, 5, 16
Free solutions, 38 Interaction factor, 182
Frozen n-port, 66 Interconnection of ideal transformers, 27
lnterreciprocity, 61
Gauss algorithm, 394 Internal impedance of generator, 158
Gauss matrix, 388 Internal variables, 3, 46, 82
Generalized network (n-port), 60, 63 Internally secular states, 46, 84
Generator, I, 5 Invariance, of number of L and C, 246,
Geometric nullity, 401 384
Global synthesis, 256 of rank, 187
Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization, 400 Inverse matrix, 386
Greatest common left divisor, 228, 411 Irreducible fraction, 131
Grounded n-port, 92, 121 Irreducible Kalman representation, 233
Gyrator, 52 Isolation (galvanic), 5, 118
Gyrator block, 398 Iterative synthesis, 256, 303
Half-pole, 166 Jacobi's theorem, 388

Halving a symmetric 2-port, 292 Jaumann structures, 207, 219
Harmonic state, 46 Jordan (block, form, matrix), 235, 413
Hermite normal form, 39, 408
Hermitian form, 394 Kalman's representation, 231
Hermitian matrix, 386 Kirchhoff laws, I, 20
Hermitian part of rational matrix, 173 Kirchhoff network (n-port), 32
Hermitian square root, 174, 403
Hilbert transform, 419 Ladder 2-port, 93
Homogeneous linear equations, 35, 392 Laplace expansion, 388
Howitt matrix, 387 Lattice impedances, 103, 206
Howitt transformation, 124, 241 Leakage inductance, 31
Hurwitz polynomial, 151 Left all-pass free, 364
Hurwitzian function, 150 Left coprime, 82, 413
Hurwitzian matrix, 165 Left divisor, 411
Hybrid matrix, 67 Left equivalent matrices, 392, 407
Hybrid coil, 205 Linear elements, 5
Linear equations, 392
Ideal transformer, 10 Linear independence, 389
Ignorable, 83 Link, 24
Ill-defined n-port, 74 Local dimensionality, 65, 77, 85
Image parameters, 180 Local rank, 86, 406
Imaginary resistance, 57 Logarithm of rational function, 420
438 index
Logarithmic reflectance (transmittance), Neper, 166

165 Network, I
Logarithmic singularity, 151, 421 Network analysis, 3
Loop, 22 Network determinant, 42, 76
Loop analysis, 95, 123 Network equations, 36
Lossless network, 44, 51 Node, 17
Lossless n-port, 46, 195 Node analysis, 96
Lossless one-port, 136 Non-dissipative (see Lossless)
Lossless representation, 238 Non-port voltage, 2
Lower triangular matrix, 388 Non-singular matrix, 386
Norator, 75, 88
McMillan form, 228 Normal form, of linear system, 392
McMillan residue matrix, 230 of transformer n-port, 14
Magnetic (core, energy, flux), 4 Normal rank, 65, 406
Magnetomotive force, 4, 12 Normalized variables, 54, 92, 169
Matched 2-port, 177,210,217 Norton's impedance transformation, 112
Matched 3-port, 197 Norton's theorem, 158
Matched 4-port, 201 Nullator, 75, 87
Matched n-port, 172 Nullity, of graph, 21
Matching transformer, 159 of matrix, 393
Matrix, 385 of transformer n-port, 16
Maximum available power, 159 Nullor, 76
Maximum modulus theorem, 41 7 Number, of elements in n-port synthesis,
Maximum number of parameters (see 132, 252
Number) of gyrators, 193, 248
Maximum real part, 418 of n-port equations, 34, 63
Minimum-loss attenuator, 178 of parameters of constant matrices, 95,
Minimum number of reactive elements, 392
246, 384 of reactances, 132
Minimum-phase transmittance, 168 of resistances, 192
Minimum-reactance, 150 of transmission zeros, 281
Minimum real part, 136, 418
Minimum-resistance, 150 Odd function, 131
Minor, 387 Oono-Yasuura algorithm, 361
Mismatch factor, 181 Open-circuit voltage ratio, 300
Modified Brune section, 264 Order of a pole, 132, 184
Modulation, 57 Oriented branch, I 7
Monie polynomial, 406 Oriented dual, 56
Multiwinding transformer, 12 Oriented graph, 20
Mutual inductance, 5, 9 Oriented loop, 22
Orthogonal matrix, 171
n-port, 2 Orthogonal vectors, 400
n-port analysis, 3 Orthogonal transformation, 188,239,400
n-port equations, 3, 63 Orthonormal set, 400
n-port synthesis, 3
n-terminal subnetwork, 2 II-network, 98
(n + !)-terminal subnetwork, 92 Pantell circuit, 272
n-vector, 385 Para-conjugate, 72
2n-port sections, 310, 319 Para-even part, 150
Negative impedance converter, 119 Para-odd, 131, 150
index 439
Para-skew matrix, 72, 185 Reactive elements, 37, 132

Para-unitary, 161, 165, 189 Reactive power, 49
Paramount matrix, 122 Real constant matrix, 406
Partial fraction expansion, 132 Real elements, 62
Partial specification, of impedance, 140 Real instantaneous envelope power, 59
of lossless 2-port, 280 Real Kalman representation, 237
Partition matrix, 20 Real lossless n-port, 195
Partitioned matrix, 386 Real network (n-port), 62
Passivity, 71 Real polynomial, 406
Path, 24 Realization, 4, 84
Path-set matrix, 25 Reciprocity, 50, 73
Perfect coupling, 9 Reduced constraint matrix, 15
Permanent oscillation, 44 Reduced incidence matrix, 22
Permeance, 4, 12 Reference resistance, 54
Permutation matrix, 197 Reflectance, 160
Phase-shift, 166 Reflected signal, 162
Planar graph, 25, 55 Relabeling, 389
Polarity, 3 Relations, between attenuation and
Pole, of rational function, 132 phase, 168
of matrix, 184 between modulus and phase, 151,421
Polynomial matrix, 406 between n-port matrices, 169
Port, 2 between real and imaginary parts, 151,
Port variables, 3, 6, 46 419
Positive definite matrix, 7, 394 Relative polarity, 6
Positive function, 71, 131 Reluctance, 4
Positive matrix, 71, 183 Residue, 132
Positive real function, 131 Residue matrix, 184
Positive real matrix, 71 Resistance, 1, 4
Positive scalar, 394 Resistance-reduced, 303
Positive square root matrix, 396 Return loss, phase, 166
Positive terminal, 3 Richard's theorem, 261
Potential, 20 Right-inverse, 364
Power conservation, 16, 49 Row-vector, 385
Primary, 7, 16 Row-echelon form, 408
Principal minor, 391
Scale transformations, 154
Quadratic form, 393 Scattering matrix, 163
Quadrature component, 59 of lossless 2-port, 276
of symmetric 2-port, 208
RC, RL one-port, 156 of transformer n-port, 170
Radian, 166 Sea, 55
Rank, of graph, 21 Secondary, 7, 16
of quadratic form, 394 Secular solution, 40
Rank, of inductance n-port, 7 Self-inductance, 6
of matrix, 389 Separate parts, 21
of transformer n-port, 16 Series-aiding (-opposing), 8
Ratio, 10 Series ports, 16, 47, 68
Ratio matrix, 16, 120 Series-parallel interconnection, 69
Rational function, 67 Shunt ports, 16, 47, 68
Reactance, 138 Signal, 162
440 index
Signature, 398 Transfer matrix, 286

Similarity transformation, 236, 400 Transformer, 7
Simple pole, 133 Transient, 44
Simply degenerate, 187 Transmission zero, 166, 281, 288
Singular matrix, 185, 386 Transmittance, 164
Skew matrix, 185, 386 Transpose matrix, 385
Skew para-hermitian, 72, 183 Transpose network (n-port), 61, 72
Skew-hermitian, 173, 386 Tree, 22
Smith form, 409 True n-port, 2
Smooth phase, 152, 422 Turns, 4
Span, 230,333 Turns ratio, 9
Stability, 42 Twisted dual, 93, 178
Standard form, 32
State, 3 Uncontrollable, 80, 274
State function, 6 Unimodular elimination, 64
State variable, 4, 37 Unimodular matrix, 39, 84, 406
Steady-state, 46 Unipolar component, 132, 228
Stieltjes fraction, 141 Unit matrix, 385
Strictly positive (definite), 394 Unitary bordering, 359
Strong degree, 225 Unitary function, 161
Subgraph, 23, 56 Unitary matrix, 460
Submatrix, 386 Unitary transformation, 174, 188, 238,
Subnetwork, 2 400
Superdominant matrix, 121 Upper-triangular matrix, 239, 388
Superposition principle, 44
Susceptance, 138 Vertex, 17
Sylvester's law of inertia, 398 Voltage, l
Symmetric attenuator, 178 Voltage constraint matrix, 14
Symmetric matrix, 386 Voltage generator, 5
Symmetric 2-port, 102, 206, 279 Voltage per turn, 12
Symmetric relabeling, 391 Voltage vector, 6
Symmetric terminating set, 203
Symmetry, of impedance matrix, 7 Weak degree, 225
of scattering matrix, 165 Weak equivalence, 81
System of independent loops, 22 Well-defined n-port, 66
Well-defined network, 37, 47
T-network, 97 Wave amplitude, 162
Terminal, 2 Wave vector, 163
Terminating set, 203
Thevenin's theorem, 158 Y-Ll transformation, 99
Time-invariance, 5 Youla section, 263
Topological constraint matrix, 21
Totally unimodular matrix, 23 Zero matrix, 385
Trace, 172, 389 Zero state, 81
Transfer impedance, 67

Classical Network Theory - Vitold Belevitch

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Classical Network Theory - Vitold Belevitch

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Classical

Chapter I. Elements and connections

Chapter 2. Network analysis

Chapter 4. Basic structures and transformations

Chapter 5. Synthesis of passive one-ports

Chapter 6. Reflection and transmission

Chapter 7. Positive matrices and bounded matrices

Chapter 8. Degree and canonic forms

Chapter 9. Lossless 2-ports

Chapter I0. Synthesis of passive n-ports

Chapter 12. Unitary bordering of scattering matrices

Appendix A. Matrix algebra

Appendix B. Properties of analytic functions

Elements and connections

limits if one wishes to avoid completely unrealistic constructions. From the

3. It is often convenient to separate conceptually some part of a network

4. Since the total current entering an isolated electrical system is zero, a

ticular case of a t-terminal subnetwork, it is not a network. In particular, it

5. Then ports of an n-port will be numbered 1, 2, ... , n. The two terminals

6. In the problem of network analysis, the description of a complete network

7. In the problem of n-port synthesis, one wants to construct an n-port having

implicitly, one n-port but rather an equivalence class (possible vacuous) of

8. At the level of elements, the problems of analysis and synthesis disappear.

10. The definition of a resistance can alternatively be written i = Gv, where

specified for an inductance. Since the state is completely specified by v for a

12. A voltage generator is a one-port defined by v = e, where e is a given

15. For conventional linear time-invariant inductance n-ports, the para-

By comparison with w = dTm/dt, the energy increase is

Since Tm is a state function of the i1, its total differential is

which proves that

16. Expression (6) can be rewritten

Consequently, the magnetic energy is

altering either Lu or L 22 , so that the representation of Fig. 2 is equivalent

20. If Lu or L22 vanishes, so does L12 by A.40, so mutual inductances have no

,'21. For an inductance 2-port, the coupling coefficient is defined by

23. Although derived from an inductance 2-port, the ideal transformer is

behavior in DC (direct current), whereas in the definition of the ideal trans-

Ideal transformer n-ports

by summing the current equations. On the other hand, eliminating u be-

v1/n1 = v2/n2 = · · · =vk/nk (18)

Fm. 1.6 Fm. 1.7

26. Consider (Fig. 8) a numbers of k-winding ideal transformers and connect

Elimination of u from (20) is equivalent to a transformation of (20) by

A method of deducing from M a matrix K satisfying (22) will be described

29. The replacement of M by TM may be of interest, since it may reduce

~ ] (r)(s -r) (26)

31. If the transformer k-port of current-constraint matrix M is realized as

(r+1)' (r+2)' k'

32. The form (32) of M is called a normal form of the current-constraint

1' 2' k' (r+l)' k' b'

FIG. 1.10 FIG. 1.11 FIG. 1.12

35. Algebraically, r is restricted by 0 < r:::;; k, but the extreme cases r = 0

(R, L, C) or n-ports (for instance, branches 1 and 2 may be the windings of a

(l) strap together terminals l' 2 3

+ l if subset i contains terminal j

39. If an abstraction is made from the electrical nature of the branches in a

42. As a particular case of 34, a connection k-port conserves instantaneous

43. The invariants r (rank of M) and nullity q = k - r introduced in 32 are

44. In 31 it was shown that, for r < s, s - r rows of the current-constraint

46. If K has rank m, some m of its row-vectors form linearly independent

47. By opening certain branches of a graph, one defines a subgraph. Since

49. Let the reduced partition matrix, partitioned as in (23), be bordered by

[~aa Mab] (r)

50. If one opens the q = k - r branches corresponding to subscript b, thus